Property Outline

BOOK II
Property, Ownership, and its Modifications
TITLE I. – CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY

PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS
What is property?
ARTICLE 414. “All things which are or may be the object of

appropriation are considered either:
(1) Immovable or real property; or

(2) Movable or personal property
Property is any physical or incorporeal entity capable of becoming

the object of a juridical relation.
As a subject in a law course, property is that branch of civil law

which classified and defines the different kinds of appropriable objects,
provides for their acquisition and loss, and in general, treats of the
nature and consequences of real rights.
The terms real property and personal property are common law
terms while immovable property and movable property are civil law
terms.
What are the distinctions of property, right to property and

ownership?
Property is an economic concept, meaning a mass of things or

objects useful to human activity and which are necessary to life, for
which reason they may in one way or another be organized and
distributed, but always for the use of man.
The right to property is clearly different from property, and is

defined as “the juridical tie by virtue of which a person has the exclusive
power to receive or obtain all the benefits from a thing, except those
prohibited or restricted by law or by the rights of others.”
Ownership and right to property refer to the same idea, except that
right to property emphasizes the vinculum between man and the thing. At
present, the two terms are used synonymously and interchangeably.
Distinguish between things and property.

Page 2 2012 Notes Compilation on Property and Modes of Acquiring Ownership
By things are meant all objects that exist, and can be of some use
to man. On the other hand, property means all those that are already
appropriated or are in the possession of man. Thus, while things are all
those that can be possessed, property means those that are already
possessed and are found in man’s patrimony. The idea of things is
therefore more generic and extensive than the idea of property.
Things, in a juridical sense, includes only objects which can be of

utility to man. For juridical purpose, things cannot include any object
whatsoever, but only those that can give some good or utility to man and
which can be the objects of juridical relations. Only those capable of
pecuniary estimation enter into the concept of things.
Things are property in a juridical sense, not only when they are
useful to man, but when they are appropriated. The sea, the air, or the
sunlight are indispensable to life on earth; but they are not property
because they cannot be appropriated for the benefit of any individual or
even any nation. In order to constitute property, however, it is not
necessary that the thing has an owner. It is enough that it has been
appropriated, even if it may later have no owner, such as abandoned
property.
The Civil Code, however, uses in Article 414 the words things and
property as identical to each other. From the view of the Code, therefore,
property includes not only things which are already possessed by man,
but also those which are susceptible of being possessed by him.
What requisites must concur in order for an object to be

juridically considered things or property?
a. Utility or the capacity to satisfy moral or economic wants

and human needs;
b. Individuality and substance, or a separate and autonomous
existence;
c. Susceptibility of being appropriated.
What are common things?
They are things which, as a whole mass, are not susceptible of

appropriation, but a limited quantity of the whole mass may be
appropriated and thereby converted into property. The sun, the states or
the sea called common things are not things or property in the juridical
concept.
Is the living human body considered a thing or property?
By: Kathryn Pineda-Dela Serna

In general, the living human body is not considered as things,

although some parts of it are considered things when they are separated
from it; such as the hair and the teeth. These belong to the person from
shoes body they were separated.
Is a corpse considered a thing?
Upon death, the corpse becomes a thing, although it is not

susceptible of appropriation and commerce by reason of public morality.
It cannot be subject to an onerous contract, although a gratuitous

disposition for scientific purposes is valid.
Are res nullius objects considered things?
One of the requisites of a thing for juridical purposes is that it is

susceptible of appropriation, although it is not actually appropriated.
Therefore, things which have been intentionally abandoned by their
owners, or res nullius, are still considered in law as things, even if for the
moment they have no owners, because they can still be the object of
appropriation.
What is the meaning of appropriation?
The Code does not define appropriation. It has been considered

equivalent to occupation, which is the willful apprehension of a corporeal
object which has no owner, with intent to acquire its ownership.
Are rights considered things?
Things, in a juridical sense, include not only material objects, but

also rights, although these are relations and objects. However, only
rights which are not patrimonial, such as right to liberty or family rights
cannot be considered property.
What are the two kinds of rights?
1. Real rights – a real right is the power to a person over a specific

thing, without a passive subject individually determined against
whom such right may be personally exercised. It gives a person a
direct and immediate juridical power over a thing, which is
susceptible, not only against a determinate person, but against the
whole world.
2. Personal rights – a personal right is the power belonging to one

person to demand of another, as a definite passive subject, the

fulfillment of a presentation to give, to do or not to do. Personal

right is more properly called right of obligation or simply
obligation.
What the elements that manifest the characteristics of real

rights?
1. A subject and an object connected by a relation of ownership of

the former over the latter.
2. A general obligation or duty of respect for such relation, there
being no particular passive subject.
3. Effective actions recognized by law to protect such relation
against anyone who may want to disturb it.
What are the characteristics of personal rights?
1. There are two subjects, active and passive, who are determined
and specified; the passive subject being bound to perform the
prestation incumbent upon him by reason of a juridical tie which
binds him to the active subject.
2. A general obligation on the part of third persons to respect the
relations between the active and subject subjects.
3. Effective actions in favor of the active subject against the passive
subject for the performance of the prestation by the latter or so
that the relationship between them may produce its natural and
juridical effects.
How are things classified by reason of ownership?
1. Common (res communes) – those which do not belong to anyone in

particular. They are those owned by everybody in that their use
and enjoyments are given to all of mankind. Examples are the air
we breathe, the wind, sunlight, and starlight.
2. Public – those owned by the State but enjoyed by all; (a) For direct
general use, such as ports, rivers, roads; (b) For indirect use, such
as fortresses, mines.
3. Corporate – those owned by a collective entity and enjoyed by its

members, such as property of municipal corporations or of towns
and cities: (a) Patrimonial – those which are enjoyed in common by
the people but whose products are applied to the expense of the
municipality; (b) Communal – those which are used by all those
living in the town such as roads, plazas.

4. Res nullius – things belonging to no one because they have not

been appropriated (like fish still swimming in the ocean), or
because they have been abandoned (res derelictae) by the owner
with the intention of no longer owning them. Other examples
include wild animals (ferae naturae), wild birds, and pebbles lying
on the sea shore.
5. Private or res alicujus – objects which are owned privately, either

collective or individual capacity.
How is property classified according to its nature?
According to its nature, property may be either:
1. Immovable or real property – when they cannot be

transferred from to place: (a) By their nature; (b) By
incorporation; (c) By their destination; (d) By analogy.
2. Movable or personal property – those which can by their

nature be moved from place to place without injury: (a) By
their nature- all inanimate things; (b) By analogy, including
real and personal rights over movable property and those
which are made so by express provision of law, such as
transferrable public offices.
3. Semi-movables – those which move by themselves, such as

wild, domesticated or tame animals.
This class has already disappeared. Animals belong to

this class but are now treated generally as movables, except the
young in fishponds, pigeon houses and other breeding places
mentioned in No. 6 of Article 415.
How are things classified by reason of their importance?
1. Principal – those which other things are considered dependent or

subordinate such as the land on which a house is built.
2. Accessory – those which are dependent upon or subordinated to

the principal.
The general rule is that the accessory follows the principal. An

exception to the general rules is reverse accession (Article 120, Family
Code).

The distinction is important in sales. When one buys a car, the car
should include the accessories such as the spare tire, the radio, etc. The
distinction is also important in lease contracts.
How is property classified according to its ownership?
According to its ownership, it may either be:
1. Of public ownership (Article 419); or

2. Of private ownership (Article 419).
What is the importance of classifying property into

immovables and movables?
1. Formalities required, like in mortgages (Lopez vs. Orosa, Associated

Insurance vs. Iya, and Tumalad vs. Vicencio), or in donations since
the form will be different.
2. Prescription;
3. To bind third persons.
How is property classified according to its essential form?
According to its essential form, property may either be:
1. Corporeal; or
2. Incorporeal, i.e., shares of stock, goodwill in a business.
The distinction is important for areas such as mode of transfer
How is property classified according to designation?
According to designation, property may either be:
1. Specific - the object is individually determined. For example, I

promise to sell you my car with license plate KDJ-377.
2. Generic - the object is determined only as to its kind. For
example, I promise to sell you 1000 kilos of rice.
The distinction is important in legacies and donations. The

distinction is also important in extinguishing obligations.
How is property classified according to its susceptibility to

substitution?

According to its susceptibility to substitution, property may either

be:
1. Fungible - means that the thing can be substituted with

another thing of the same kind or quality. This is determined
by the intent of the parties. For example, if A borrows a book
from B, it may be the intention of the parties that B return the
exact same book since it has A‘s annotations on it.
2. Non-Fungible
How is property classified according to its aptitude for

repeated use?
According to its aptitude for repeated use, property may either be:
1. Consumable - those movables which cannot be used in a manner

appropriate to their nature without their being consumed.
2. Nonconsumable - all others kinds of movables.
The legal definition of consumable in Article 1933 1 is not

appropriate. The subject matter of a commodatum may be a consumable
or not. But, it must be non-fungible since the exact, same thing must be
returned. In a mutuum, the obligor can return a different thing as long
as it is of the same kind and quality.
How is property classified according to its susceptibility to

division?
According to its susceptibility to division, property may either be:
1. Divisible; or
2. Indivisible
1Article 1933. “By the contract of loan, one of the parties delivers to another,
either something not consumable so that the latter may use the same for a certain time
and return it, in which case the contract is called a commodatum; or money or other
consumable thing, upon the condition that the same amount of the same kind and
quality shall be paid, in which case the contract is simply called a loan or mutuum.
Commodatum is essentially gratuitous.
Simple loan may be gratuitous or with a stipulation to pay interest.
In commodatum the bailor retains the ownership of the thing loaned, while in
simple loan, ownership passes to the borrower.”

The distinction is important in partition (either physical or

constructive partition).
How is property classified according to its existence in time?
According to its existence in time, property may either be:
1. Present – res existens; or

2. Future – res futurae
The distinction is important in sales. It is also important in

donations. A party cannot donate future things. It is also important in
succession. A party cannot enter into a contract regarding future
inheritance.
CHAPTER 1 – IMMOVABLE PROPERTY
What are the immovable properties enumerated by law?
ARTICLE 415. “The following are immovable property:
(1) Land, buildings, roads and constructions of all kinds

adhered to the soil;
(2) Trees, plants, and growing fruits, while they are attached
to the land or form an integral part of an immovable;
(3) Everything attached to an immovable in a fixed manner,

in such a way that it cannot be separated therefrom without
breaking the material or deterioration of the object;
(4) Statues, reliefs, paintings or other objects for use or

ornamentation, placed in buildings or on lands by the owner of the
immovable in such a manner that it reveals the intention to attach
them permanently to the tenements;
(5) Machinery, receptacles, instruments or implements

intended by the owner of the tenement for an industry or works
which may be carried on in a building or on a piece of land, and
which tend directly to meet the needs of the said industry or
works;

(6) Animal houses, pigeon-houses, beehives, fish ponds or

breeding places of similar nature, in case their owner has placed
them or preserves them with the intention to have them
permanently attached to the land, and forming a permanent part
of it; the animals in these places are included;
(7) Fertilizer actually used on a piece of land;
(8) Mines, quarries, and slag dumps, while the matter thereof
forms part of the bed, and waters either running or stagnant;
(9) Docks and structures which, though floating, are intended by

their nature and object to remain at a fixed place on a river, lake,
or coast;
(10) Contracts for public works, and servitudes and other real
rights over immovable property.”
What are the categories or classes of immovables?
There are four categories or classes of immovables:
1. Immovable or real by nature, or those which cannot be moved from

place to place, such as those mentioned in Nos. 1 and 8 in Article
415. 2
2. Immovable or real by incorporation, or those which are essentially

movables but are attached to an immovable in such a manner as
to form an integral part thereof, such as those mentioned in Nos.
2, 3, and 7 of Article 415. 3
Note that growing fruits and crops are movables in other

laws, i.e. chattel mortgage law.
In No. 3, it is the result which is important; that it cannot be

removed without causing damage. There is no requirement that the
attachment be done by the owner, it can be done by anyone.
2 Article 414, No. 1 - Land, buildings, roads, and constructions of all kinds
adhered to the soil. No. 8 - mines, quarries, and slag dumps, while the matter thereof
forms part of the bed, and waters either running or stagnant.
3 Article 414, No. 2 - Trees, plants, and growing fruits, while they are attached to
the land or form an integral part of an immovable. No. 3 - Everything attached to an

immovable in a fixed manner, in such a way that it cannot be separated therefrom
without breaking the material or deterioration of the object. No. 7 - Fertilizer actually
used on a piece of land).

In No. 7, the fertilizer is real property since it becomes an

integral part of the soil.
3. Immovable or real by destination, or those which are essentially

movables but are placed in an immovable for the use,
ornamentation, exploitation or perfection of such immovable, such
as those mentioned in Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 9 of Article 415. 4
4. Immovable or real by analogy; or those which are considered

immovables by operation of law, such as those mentioned in No.
10 of Article 415. 5
A theater was constructed using lumber. The lumber supplier

was not paid. The lumber supplier contends that his material-man‘s
lien extends to the land. Is his contention correct?
In the case of Lopez vs. Orosa (G.R. Nos. L-10817-18, February 28,
1958), it was ruled that the material man‘s lien attaches only to the
building since a building is an immovable property by itself.
Is a chattel mortgage over a house valid?
In Associated Insurance vs. Iya (No. L-10827-38, 30 May 1958, 103

Phil. 972), it was held that the chattel mortgage over the house was void
since a house is an immovable and not chattel. On the other hand, in
Tumalad vs. Vicencio (G.R. No. L-30173 September 30, 1971), it was held
that the parties may treat the house as chattel. The Supreme Court
further added that the mortgagor is estopped from assailing the validity
of the chattel mortgage over the house. In Navarro vs. Central Altagracia,
Inc. 225 U.S. 58, it was held that a building may be considered a personal
property if there is a stipulation as when it is used as security in the
payment of an obligation where a chattel mortgage is executed over it . It
may also be considered personal property if the building is bought for
4
Article 414, No. 4 - Statues, reliefs, paintings or other objects for use or
ornamentation, placed in buildings or on lands by the owner of the immovable in such
a manner that it reveals the intention to attach them permanently to the tenements. No.
5 - Machinery, receptacles, instruments or implements intended by the owner of the
tenement for an industry or works which may be carried on in a building or on a piece
of land, and which tend directly to meet the needs of the said industry or works. No. 6 -
Animal houses, pigeon-houses, beehives, fish ponds or breeding places of similar
nature, in case their owner has placed them or preserves them with the intention to
have them permanently attached to the land, and forming a permanent part of it; the
animals in these places are included. No. 9 - Docks and structures which, though
floating, are intended by their nature and object to remain at a fixed place on a river,
lake, or coast.
5 Article 414, No. 10 - Contracts for public works, and servitudes and other real
rights over immovable property.

purposes of demolishing the same. In this case, the materials resulting

from the demolition are being bought. Likewise, structures which are
mere superimposition on the land, like barong-barong are not
immovables.
How do you reconcile the rulings of Associated Insurance vs.

Iya and Tumalad vs. Vicencio?
Tumalad vs. Vicencio applies only if no 3rd parties are prejudiced.
Is it correct to say that the Tumalad ruling tells us that a

chattel mortgage over a building is proper?
No, it does not. A chattel mortgage over a building is always

improper since a building is always an immovable. In Tumalad vs.
Vicencio, as between the parties, the chattel mortgage is enforceable. The
parties are estopped from assailing the validity.
Are uprooted trees immovable property?
Trees and plants are immovable only when they are attached to the
land. Uprooted trees are personal, except uprooted timber if the land is
timber land as it constitutes the natural product of the tenement and
still forms an integral part of the immovable.
Are ungathered fruits immovable?
Ungathered fruits, whether the land on which they are planted is

being leased or owned, are immovable, except when the ungathered
fruits are sold, in which case they are considered sale of movable.
Act No. 1508, the Chattel Mortgage Law, recognizes that growing
crops are personal property and may be the object of chattel mortgage.
What is the difference between Nos. 3 and 4?
In paragraph 3:
1. It cannot be separated from immovable without breaking or

deterioration;
2. It need not be placed by the owner;
3. It is real property by incorporation.
While in paragraph 4:

1. It can be separated from immovable without breaking or

deterioration;
2. It must be placed by the owner, or by his agent, express or
implied;
3. It is real property by incorporation and destination.
Are electric poles immovable?
In Board of Assessments vs. MERALCO (G.R. No. L-15334, January

31, 1964), the MERALCO was assessed real property tax on its electric
poles. The theory was that the same are real property being adhered to
the soil. The Supreme Court said that the electric poles are not real
property since they can be removed. Such poles were not attached in
fixed manner.
What are the requisites for immobilization in No. 4?
1. It is an object of ornamentation or object of use.

2. The object is placed on a building or land.
3. The installation was made by the owner of the building or the land.
4. It is attached in such a manner that it reveals an intention to
attach it permanently.
A leased a building to B for a term of ten years. B established a

shoe factory in the building and as a result he installed certain
machineries therein. Are such machineries movables or
immovables?
The machineries are movables. In order that the machineries can

be classified as immovables within the meaning of No. 5 of Article 415 of
the Civil Code, it is essential that the following requisites must concur:
1. The placing must be made by the owner of the tenement, his agent
or duly authorized legal representative;
2. The industry or works must be carried on in the building or on the
land;
3. The machines, etc. must tend directly to meet the needs of said
industry or works;
4. The machines must be essential and principal elements in the
industry, and not merely incidental.
This excludes those which are merely for decorative purposes, and
even those which are necessary for other purposes distinct from the
requirements of the industry or works being carried on in the tenement.
What is the exception to paragraph 5?

When placed on the land or tenement by a tenant (Davao Sawmill

vs. Castillo, 61 Phil. 709).
What is the exception to the exception?
When the tenant had promised to leave the machinery on the

tenement at the end of the lease, or when he acted as agent of the owner
of the land (Valdez vs. Central Altagracia, Inc., 225 U.S. 58).
A real estate mortgage over a sugar cane mill and all its
necessary complements central was entered into. Additional
machinery was bought to increase the sugar central‘s capacity. Is
the additional machinery an immovable?
In Berkenkotter vs. Cu Unjieng (G.R. No. L-41643, July 31, 1935), it

was ruled that the additional machinery immobilized under No. 5 of
Article 415. Thus, the additional machinery is included in the real estate
mortgage.
Would it have made a difference if there was no stipulation

that the real estate mortgage would cover future improvements?
In Berkenkotter vs. Cu Unjieng, the Supreme Court answered in the

negative because the improvements would be covered automatically by
law as the same are immobilized. Of course, the parties are free to
stipulate what may be excluded from the mortgage.
A is the owner of a painting. He lent it to B who attached the

same on the wall of his house to beautify it at its blessing with the
obligation to return it within two days after the house blessing. Is
the painting immovable?
No, it is movable due to the lack of intent to attach it permanently.
A constructed his building on a piece of land belonging to B, to

whom A pays a monthly rental. Is the building a real or personal
property?
Buildings being immovable by nature, the ownership of the land on

which they are erected cannot change the nature as immovable property.
Thus, the building is a real or immovable property. Whether

constructed on land belonging to the owner of the building or on land
belonging to another, from the viewpoint of the law and third persons,

the building is real property by incorporation within the meaning of No. 1

of Article 415.
In the enumeration of properties under Article 415, the inclusion of

“building” separate and distinct from the land can only mean that a
building is by itself an immovable property. Thus a building by itself may
be mortgaged apart from the land on which it has been built. Such a
mortgage would still be a real estate mortgage.
Suppose a mortgagor and a mortgagee enter into a chattel

mortgage over a house constructed on a rented land belonging to a
third person. Insofar as the mortgagor and the mortgagee are
concerned, how is the mortgaged house considered?
The mortgaged house is considered as a movable between the

parties because estoppel applies between them.
Suppose that the mortgagee forecloses the chattel mortgage

without complying with the formalities of law pertaining to real
property mortgage, can the mortgagor question the validity of the
sale by virtue of the mortgage?
Yes, although the chattel mortgage is binding between them

applying the doctrine of estoppels, yet, as far as the law is concerned, the
house, whether constructed on rented land or land belonging to the
owner of such house, is still real property. Consequently, the
requirements of the Rules of Court with regard to the procedure of
foreclosure must be complied with. Hence the ensuing sale is void.
Is the right over a mortgage on land movable or immovable?
It depends. If the mortgage is registered in the Registry of Property,

it constitutes a real right over an immovable within the meaning of No.
10 of Article 415, which declares that contracts for public works,
servitudes and other real right over immovable property are classified as
immovable property. However, if the mortgage is not registered, although
valid between the contracting parties, it cannot be classified as
immovable property.
Is a wall or fence considered an immovable?

Yes, it is an immovable by incorporation. It is included in the

enumeration “constructions of all kinds”. This is true even if the fence or
wall is built only of stones as long as there is an intent to permanently
annex the same. This includes cemented dikes.
Are railroad tracks or rails immovable?
Yes, for although they are not exactly roads, they are
constructions.
Are wooden scaffoldings on which painters stand while panting

the wall of a house considered immovable?
No, in view of their lack of adherence to the soil.
Are growing crops on another’s land immovable?
Yes, since the law does not make a distinction. Growing crops
whether on one’s land or on another’s, as in the case of a usufructuary, a
possessor or a tenant is considered real property. The important things is
for them to be still attached to the land. Once they have been severed,
they become personal property even if left still scattered or lying about
the land.
Standing crops, ungathered fruits or growing fruits are included.

Plants on pots used for ornamentation are movables.
Are these personal or real properties? A fixed fire escape

stairway embedded in the walls of a house; an aqueduct; a sewer; a
well.
They are immovables because they are attached to an immovable

in a fixed manner (res vinta) in such a way that they cannot be separated
therefrom without breaking the material or deterioration of the object.

Note that under this paragraph, for the incorporated thing to be

considered real property, the injury or breakage or deterioration in case
of separation must be substantial.
Suppose the properties referred to in No. 3 are temporarily

removed, but there is an intention to replace them, should they be
considered real or personal property?
They should be considered as personal property inasmuch as the

“incorporation” has ceased.
Are these real or personal properties? A permanent painting

on the ceiling; a picture embedded in the concrete walls of a house;
a rug or carpet fastened to the floor.
They are immovable under paragraph 4.
Are the steel towers or poles of Meralco real or personal

properties?
They are personal properties because they do not come under

paragraph 1 as they are neither buildings or constructions adhered to
the soil. They do not come under paragraph 3 because they are not
attached to an immovable in a fixed manner, that is, they can be
separated without breaking the material or causing deterioration of the
object to which they are attached. They do not come also under
paragraph 5 because they are not machineries, receptacles or
instruments, but even if they are, they are not intended for an industry
to be carried on in the premises.
Are storage tanks of an electric company installed on a leased

land real or personal properties?
They are real properties and are subject to realty taxes.
What are the requisites in No. 6 to be considered an

immovable?
1. The structure is placed by the owner.

2. The installation must be with the intention to have them

permanently attached and forming a part of it.
In No. 6, suppose that the animals are temporarily outside, are

they now considered personal properties?
They are still considered real property as long as the intent to

return is present, as in the case of a homing pigeon. But in the point of
view of criminal law, they must be considered as personal property, and
may be properly be the object of theft or robbery.
If the animals in paragraph 6 are alienated, are they

considered real or personal properties?
The transaction is an alienation of personal property unless the

building or tenement is itself also alienated. This is because in said
alienation, the animal structures must of necessity be detached from the
immovable.
Is a temporary cage structure real or personal property?
Since it is easily removable and can be moved from one place to

another, it is a personal property. The birds inside are also personal
property.
Are fertilizers still in the barn or those already on the ground

but are still wrapped in some kind of a covering real or personal
properties?
They are personal properties because the law says that they must
be actually used or spread over the land.
Are minerals still attached to mines real or personal

properties?
They are real properties; but when they have been extracted, they
become personal properties.
Is water a real or personal property?

The “waters” referred to in paragraph 8 are those still attached to

or running through the soil or ground. But “water” itself as distinguished
from “waters” is clearly personal. Upon the other hand, canals, rivers,
lakes and such part of the sea as may be the object of appropriation are
classified as real property.
Are floating houses tied to a shore or bank post and used as a

residence considered a real property?
Yes, because the waters on which it floats are immovable. The

classification of the accessory (floating house) follows the classification of
the principal (waters). However, if the floating house makes it a point to
journey from place to place, it assumes the category of a vessel.
Are vessels real or personal properties?
They are personal properties.
Is the piece of paper on which the contract for public works

has been written a real or personal property?
The piece of paper is a personal property, but the contract itself,

meaning the right to the contract is a real property under paragraph 10.
Name other real rights over an immovable.
1. Real estate mortgage

2. Antichresis
3. Possessory retention
4. Usufruct
5. Leases of personal property when the leases have been registered
in the Registry of Property or even if they are not registered if their
duration is more than a year
6. Sugar quotas
What is the requirement in order that a real right may be

considered a real property?
For a real right to be considered real property, the real right must
be over an immovable property. For example, the real right of ownership
of the land is considered real property while the real right of ownership
over a bag is considered personal property.

In a contract for public works, which is considered real

property?
It is the contract itself that is the real property.
For example, the contract to build the EDSA flyover is real property
in itself.
Are contracts for private works real property?
No, they are personal property.
CHAPTER 2 – MOVABLE PROPERTY
What are the movable properties under the law?
The following are deemed to be personal property:
ARTICLE 416. “The following things are deemed to be personal

property:
(1) Those movables susceptible of appropriation which are not

included in the preceding article;
(2) Real property which by any special provision of law is

considered as personalty;
(3) Forces of nature which are brought under control by

science; and
(4) In general, all things which can be transported from place

to place without impairment of the real property to which they are
fixed.”
ARTICLE 417. “The following are also considered as personal

property:
(1) Obligations and actions which have for their object

movables or demandable sums; and
(2) Shares of stock of agricultural, commercial and industrial

entities, although they may have real estate.”

How does Act No. 1508, the Chattel Mortgage Law, categorize
growing crops as property?
What do forces by nature include?
Forces by nature include electricity, gas, heat, oxygen, light, rays,

etc. By law, they are considered movable.
What kind of property are rights of authors, artists or

inventors over their work?
The right of the author, artist or inventor over his work is personal
property.
What do obligations as used in paragraph 1 of Article 417

include?
Obligations, as used in paragraph 1 of Article 417, mean credit,

and include all kinds of credits. It also includes bonds, which are
technically obligations of the entity issuing them.
What kind of property are credits which have for their

prestation an act or an abstention?
The law does not expressly include credits which have for their
prestation an act or an abstention; however, these are also considered
personal property because of the exclusive character of the enumeration
of real property, thus, all those not included therein are considered
personal property.
Are matured credits personal property?
Although the law uses the word “demandable” sums, matured

credits or not are likewise considered personal property.
Are shares of juridical persons other than those engaged in

agriculture, commerce and industry personal property?
Shares of juridical persons referred to in paragraph 2 of Article 417

refer to stocks in all kinds of juridical persons and not only in those
engaged in agriculture, commerce and industry.

What are the tests to determine whether property is movable

or immovable?
There are three tests applied successively to determine whether an

object is movable:
1. Whether the property is capable of being carried from place to

place (test by description).
2. Whether the change in location can be made without injuring the
real property to which it may in the meantime be attached (test by
description).
3. And finally, whether the object is not one of those enumerated or
included in Article 415 (test by exclusion).
Are shares of stocks of Ayala Land considered real property?
Shares of stocks, even if they shares of stock of Ayala Land, are

always personal property.
What are the classifications of movable property?
ARTICLE 418. “Movable property is either consumable or

nonconsumable. To the first class belong those movables which
cannot be used in a manner appropriate to their nature without
their being consumed; to the second class belong all the others.”
Movable property is either;
A. (According to their nature) [Article 418]:
1. Consumable – those which cannot be used in a manner

appropriate to their nature without their being consumed;
2. Non- consumable – any other kind of movable property (Article
418).
B. According to the intention of the parties (as to their possibility of

being substituted by others of the same kind and quality):
1. Fungible – can be replaced by an equal quality;

2. Non-fungible – cannot be replaced, the identical object must be
returned.

CHAPTER 3 - PROPERTY IN RELATION TO THE

PERSON TO WHOM IT BELONGS
ARTICLE 419. “Property is either of public dominion or of

private ownership.”
ARTICLE 420. “The following things are property of public

dominion:
(1) Those intended for public use, such as roads, canals,

rivers, torrents, ports and bridges constructed by the State, banks,
shores, roadsteads, and others of similar character;
(2) Those which belong to the State, without being for public
use, and are intended for some public service or for the
development of the national wealth.”
ARTICLE 421. “All other property of the State, which is not of

the character stated in the preceding article, is patrimonial
property.”
ARTICLE 422. “Property of public dominion, when no longer

intended for public use or for public service, shall form part of the
patrimonial property of the State.”
ARTICLE 423. “The property of provinces, cities, and

municipalities is divided into property for public use and
patrimonial property.”
ARTICLE 424. “Property for public use, in the provinces,

cities, and municipalities, consist of the provincial roads, city
streets, municipal streets, the squares, fountains, public waters,
promenades, and public works for public service paid for by said
provinces, cities, or municipalities.
All other property possessed by any of them is patrimonial

and shall be governed by this Code, without prejudice to the
provisions of special laws.”
ARTICLE 425. “Property of private ownership, besides the

patrimonial property of the State, provinces, cities, and
municipalities, consists of all property belonging to private
persons, either individually or collectively.”

What properties are for public use under paragraph 1 of Article

420?
The following are properties for public use and therefore not
subject to appropriation:
1. Shores, meaning that portion of land which is subject to the

ebb and flow of the waters of the sea;
2. The accretions or additions to the shores of the sea by the
action of the water;
3. Navigable and non-navigable streams with their channels
and their branches;
4. Creeks and esteros (estuary or inlet);
5. Streets, even if the putting of telephone posts or the planting
of coconut trees thereon have been tolerated; and
6. Beds of rivers.
What properties are for public service under paragraph 2 of

Article 420?
1. Those which belong to the State, without being for public use, and
are intended for some public service or for the development of the
national wealth.
2. They include not only those used for the defense of the territory,
but also all property devoted for public service. Public buildings
constructed by the state for its offices and functionaries belong to
this class. But buildings belonging to private persons rented by the
state for such uses are not property of public dominion.
Note that this Article does not distinguish between movables and
immovable, provided it is for public service.
What is the Regalian Doctrine?
It is the doctrine, which reserves to the State the full ownership of

all natural resources or natural wealth that may be found in bowels of
the earth.
What are the classifications of property of public dominion?
There are two kinds of property of the public dominion:
a. Public use – anyone can use, i.e., EDSA, Rizal Park;

1) Property for public use may be owned by the state (Article 420
[1]);
2) Property for public use may be owned by Local Government
Units – political subdivisions;
b. Public service – not for the general use but for some state function,
i.e., government hospitals, Malcolm Hall (Article 424);
Only the state may own property for public service (Article
420 [2]). There is no such thing as property for public service for
LGUs.
The term public dominion is a civil law term while public

domain is a common law term. Strictly speaking, they are not
synonymous.
What are the characteristics of property of the public

dominion?
1. They are outside the commerce of man except for purposes of

repairs; thus, they cannot be alienated or leased or otherwise be
the subject matter of contracts.
2. They cannot be acquired by prescription against the state because
they are outside the commerce of man. Even municipalities cannot
acquire them for use as communal lands as against the state.
3. They cannot be levied upon, i.e. execution or attachment.
4. They cannot be burdened by any voluntary easement.
5. They cannot be registered under the Land Registration Law and be
the subject of a Torrens Title.
6. In general, they can be used by everybody.
7. They may be either real or personal property.
A portion of the town plaza of a municipality was leased to a

private enterprise. Is the contract valid?
No, because it forms part of the properties for public use of

provinces, cities or municipalities. The town plaza is outside the
commerce of men (Villanueva vs. Castaneda, L-61311, September 21,
1987).
A private lot was eroded by the sea. It eventually became part

of the seabed. Has the private lot become part of the public
dominion?

In Yacapin vs. CFI (G.R. No. L-38228 September 12, 1975), it was
ruled that the private lot became part of the public dominion since it is
now part of the seabed. 6
If a land is covered by a Torrens title, will it protect the land

owner if the land becomes part of the seabed?
In Government of the Philippines vs. Cabangi (G.R. No. L-

28379 March 27, 1929), the Supreme Court said that even if the land
was covered by a Torrens title, it will not protect the land owner if the
land becomes part of the seabed. 7
If a land is temporarily inundated, would it become part of the

public dominion?
In Republic vs. CA, the Supreme Court said that the land did not
become part of the public dominion. There was only a temporary
inundation. Once the flood had subsided, the land became dry (see
Article 458).
Are creeks and forest land part of the public dominion?
Creeks and forest land form part of the public dominion.
What are the kinds of property of private ownership?
There are three kinds of property of private ownership:
1. Patrimonial property of the state;

2. Patrimonial property of LGUs (political subdivisions); and
6Marciano Yacapin sought to recover the northern portion of his land from
Buenaventurada Salon located at Barrio Agusan, Cagayan de Oro City. This northern
portion of the land containing the area had been eroded by the sea inasmuch as this
portion faces the Macajalar Bay of Cagayan de Oro and that only 5,618 square meters
is left of the land in litigation. The Supreme Court held that Salon was not deprived of
that portion of his land. It was the sea that dispossessed Yacapin of the northern
portion (See Aragon vs. Insular Government, 19 Phil. 223; Francisco vs. Government of
the Philippine Islands, 28 Phil. 505; Government of the Philippines Islands vs. Cabangis,
53 Phil. 112). It was the advance of the tidal waters which reduced the area of the land.
That was force majeure. Yacapin and the heirs of Buenaventurada Salon were not co-
owners of the land. Yacapin alone should bear the loss of the northern portion (res perit
domino suo).
7 The Supreme Court ruled that the lots in question having disappeared on
account of the gradual erosion due to the ebb and flow of the tide, and having remained
in such a state until they were reclaimed from the sea by the filling in done by the
Government, they are public land (Aragon vs. Insular Government, 19 Phil., 223;
Francisco vs. Government of the Philippine Islands, 28 Phil., 505).

3. Patrimonial property of individuals.
What are the patrimonial properties of the state?
The patrimonial properties of the state are properties over which

the state has the same rights, and of which it may dispose, to the same
extent as private individuals in relation to their own property, subject
only to administrative laws and regulations on the procedure of
exercising such rights. They exist for the state for attaining its economic
ends, as a means for its subsistence, and the preservation of its natural
organisms.
Like property of private individuals and juridical persons, they are

subject to prescription. They can be the objects of ordinary contracts.
They are:
a. All property of the state which is not of part of the public

dominion is patrimonial property (Article 421).
b. Property of public dominion, when no longer intended for public
use or for public service, shall form part of the patrimonial
property of the State (Article 422).
c. Patrimonial property of LGUs (political subdivisions).
d. Patrimonial property of individuals.
e. Property acquired by the government in execution sales, in tax
sales, and in escheats of estates of persons who die intestate
without legal heirs, and income or rents of the state.
Is the Roponggi property in Japan a patrimonial property of

the state?
In Laurel vs. Garcia (G.R. No. 92013 July 25, 1990), it was held that
the Roponggi property is property of the public dominion since it is for
public service. 8 Property of the public dominion cannot be alienated
8 The subject property in this case is one of the four (4) properties in Japan
acquired by the Philippine government under the Reparations Agreement entered into
with Japan on May 9, 1956. The Supreme Court held that “There can be no doubt that
it is of public dominion unless it is convincingly shown that the property has become
patrimonial. As property of public dominion, the Roppongi lot is outside the commerce
of man. It cannot be alienated. Its ownership is a special collective ownership for
general use and enjoyment, an application to the satisfaction of collective needs, and
resides in the social group. The purpose is not to serve the State as a juridical person,
but the citizens; it is intended for the common and public welfare and cannot be the
object of appropration. The Roppongi property is classified under paragraph 2 of Article
420 of the Civil Code as property belonging to the State and intended for some public
service.

without it being converted to patrimonial property. Once the property

has been converted, it is alienable. Roponggi has not been converted to
patrimonial property. Conversion can only take place by a formal
declaration.
Are public lands private properties of the state?
Public lands, may, under the criterion of the Civil Code, be

classified as private property of the state, as soon as they are available
for alienation or disposition. Before they have been declared so available
for disposition, they partake of property of public dominion, under Article
420, paragraph 2, “for the development of the national wealth” just like
“mines before their concessions have been granted.
May patrimonial property be alienated? If so, how?
Patrimonial property can be alienated only by an authority of law

(legislature).
When do properties of public dominion cease to be such and

become private property of the state?
Properties of public dominion cease to be such and become private

property of the state under Article 422 only upon declaration by the
government, through the executive or legislative departments to the effect
that it is no longer needed for public use or service.
What are properties of the Local Government Units?
The properties of LGUs (Articles 423 and 424) are:
1. Property for public use - consist of the provincial roads, city

streets, municipal streets, the squares, fountains, public waters,
promenades, and public works for public service paid for by said
provinces, cities, or municipalities;
2. Patrimonial property - all other property possessed by any of them.
Property for public use of provinces and towns are governed by the
same principles as property of public dominion of the same character.
They are outside the commerce of man, and therefore cannot be the
subject of private contracts, they cannot be acquired by prescription, and
they are not subject to attachments and execution. They become private
property of the province or town when no longer for public use applying
Article 422.

What properties are of private ownership belonging to private

persons?
According to Article 425, property of private ownership, besides the

patrimonial property of the State, provinces, cities, and municipalities,
consists of all property belonging to private persons, either individually
or collectively.
TITLE II. – OWNERSHIP
CHAPTER 1 - OWNERSHIP IN GENERAL
What is ownership?
Ownership is the independent and general right of a person to

control a thing particularly in his possession, enjoyment, disposition,
and recovery, subject to no restrictions except those imposed by the state
or private persons (juridical transactions), without prejudice to the
provisions of law.
In Roman Law, ownership was an absolute right. Ownership is

evolving in light of social justice, police power in order to promote the
welfare of the people and environmental concerns. Now, we have
concepts such as stewardship. Now, one must comply with safety and
environmental regulations. Now, building permits are required.
Does public dominion also mean ownership?
From the context of various provisions, it is clear that that public

dominion does not carry the idea of ownership. Property of public
dominion is not owned by the state, but pertains to the state as
territorial property. Their purpose is not to serve the state as a juridical
person but the citizens.
Are churches and other consecrated objects public property?
Churches and other consecrated objects have been considered

outside the commerce of man, but they are neither public nor private
property, in the sense that any private person can be the owner thereof.
How may ownership be exercised?
ARTICLE 427. “Ownership may be exercised over things or

rights.”

What are the kinds of ownership?
1. Full ownership – this includes all the rights of an owner;

2. Naked ownership – this is ownership where the right to the use
and the fruits has been denied (as when the usufruct thereof has
been granted to another).
3. Sole ownership – where the ownership is vested in only one person;
4. Co-ownership – where the ownership is vested in two or more
owners.
What are the traditional attributes or elements of ownership?
ARTICLE 428. “The owner has the right to enjoy and dispose
of a thing, without other limitations than those established by law.
The owner has also a right of action against the holder and
possessor of the thing in order to recover it.”
Article 120. “The ownership of improvements, whether for

utility or adornment, made on the separate property of the
spouses at the expense of the partnership or through the acts or
efforts of either or both spouses shall pertain to the conjugal
partnership, or to the original owner-spouse, subject to the
following rules:
When the cost of the improvement made by the conjugal

partnership and any resulting increase in value are more than the
value of the property at the time of the improvement, the entire
property of one of the spouses shall belong to the conjugal
partnership, subject to reimbursement of the value of the property
of the owner-spouse at the time of the improvement; otherwise, said
property shall be retained in ownership by the owner-spouse,
likewise subject to reimbursement of the cost of the improvement.
In either case, the ownership of the entire property shall be

vested upon the reimbursement, which shall be made at the time of
the liquidation of the conjugal partnership.”
Ownership is accompanied by the following rights (Phil. Banking

vs. Lui She, L-17587, Sept. 12, 1967):
1. The right to enjoy which includes:
a. Jus utendi, or the right to use or the right to receive from the
thing what it produces.

b. Jus fruendi, or the right to enjoy the fruits. Fruits may be

natural, industrial and civil.
c. Jus Abutendi, or the right to consume the thing by its use
(but not to injure others).
d. Jus possidendi or right to possess; for example, an owner is not

limited in using a bag merely as a place where goods are kept.
The owner may use the bag as a hat.
e. Jus accessions – the right to accessions
2. The right to dispose (jus dispodendi), or the right to alienate,

encumber, transform, or even to destroy the property. This
includes the right not to dispose.
3. The right to vindicate (jus vindicandi), or the right of action

available to the owner to recover the property against the holder or
possessor (Article 428) and right to exclude others.
What are the essential characteristics of ownership?
1. It is independent and can exist even without any other right.
2. It is abstract. The right of ownership exists distinctly from its

constituent or component parts (i.e. jus accessions, jus abutendi,
etc).
3. It is elastic. The component rights can be reduced or given to

others (i.e. usufruct – the right to enjoy the fruits).
4. It is exclusive. There can only be one ownership at one time. In co-

ownership, there is only one ownership, but this is shared
ownership.
5. It is generally perpetual. Ownership is generally not limited as to

time unless there is stipulation to the contrary.
6. Ownership is inherently unlimited, but it is not necessarily so.

Ownership can be restricted. These restrictions on ownership may
be imposed by the State or by juridical transactions (i.e. contract).
In several cases, the Supreme Court has upheld the validity of
deed restrictions with regard to how buildings are to be
constructed.
What are the remedies available to an owner to recover his

property?

1. Action for forcible entry – an action for the recovery of the material
or physical possession and must be brought in the Municipal Trial
Court within one year from the date of the forcible entry.
2. Action for unlawful detainer - an action for the recovery of the
material or physical possession and must be brought in the
Municipal Trial Court within one year from the date of the last
demand.
3. Accion publiciana - a plenary action for the recovery of the
possession of real estate, upon mere allegation and proof of a
better right thereto, and without allegation of proof of title. This
action can only be brought after the expiration of one year.
4. Accion reivindicatoria - an action whereby the plaintiff alleges
ownership over a parcel of land and seeks recovery of its
possession.
5. Quieting of title;
6. Replevin – action to recover possession of personal property
governed by Rule 60 of the Rules of Court.
What are the limitations upon the right of ownership?
1. General limitations imposed by the State for its benefit, such as

the power of eminent domain, the police power, and the power of
taxation;
2. Specific limitations imposed by law, such as legal servitudes;
3. Limitations imposed by the party transmitting the property either
by contract or by will (those given by the person [grantor] who gave
the thing to its present owner);
4. Limitations imposed by the owner himself, such as voluntary
servitudes, mortgages, pledges, and lease rights; and
5. Inherent limitations arising from conflict with other rights, such as
those caused by contiguity of property.
6. The constitutional prohibition regarding acquisition of real estate
by aliens.
What are the limitations on ownership for public interest?
1. Expropriation for public use;

2. Military requisitions;
3. Zonification laws and regulations;
4. Public or government monopolies;
5. Laws on waters and mines;
6. Laws on public services;
7. Public health and safety;
8. Public easements, etc.

What is the doctrine of self-help?
ARTICLE 429. “The owner or lawful possessor of a thing has

the right to exclude any person from the enjoyment and disposal
thereof. For this purpose, he may use such force as may be
reasonably necessary to repel or prevent an actual or threatened
unlawful physical invasion or usurpation of his property.”
This is one of the instances in which a person is allowed to take

the law into his own hands and to use force. Normally, the use of
violence is reserved to the sovereign power of the state.
The right in Article 429 is a possessory right only.
Article 429 is similar to Article 11, ¶4 of the Revised Penal Code. 9
When is force in defense of property justified?
1. Force must be employed by the owner, actual or presumed, or

lawful possessor, of the property;
2. That person must be in actual physical possession;
3. There must be actual or threatened physical invasion or
usurpation of the property;
4. The invasion or usurpation must be unlawful; and
5. The force employed must be reasonably necessary to repel the
invasion or usurpation.
Can a lessor avail of the right to use force to defend the

property against the lessee?
The right to use force to defend property is given only to the

immediate possessor. It cannot be availed of by a lessor against a lessee
in possession but who has lost the right to continue possessing the
property.
9 Article 11. “Justifying circumstances. – The following do not incur any

criminal liability:
xxx
4. Any person who, in order to avoid an evil or injury, does an act which causes
damage to another, provided that the following requisites are present:
First. That the evil sought to be avoided actually exists;

Second. That the injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it;
Third. That there be no other practical and less harmful mean of preventing it.”

Can a third person take necessary measure to repel the

aggression?
Not only the possessor, but also a third person may take the
necessary measure to repel the aggression. In such a case, the third
person acts as a negotiorum gestor; and if he suffers injury in the
defense, the possessor must indemnify him.
A owns a parcel of land in Nazareth. A sees B‘s goons. B tells

A to get out. A successfully thwarts the invasion. B‘s goons are
injured. Can A be successfully charged with physical injuries?
No, if reasonable force was used.
In the same example, B‘s goons succeeds in throwing out A. A

comes back and inflicts force. Is this allowed?
No, A is not in physical possession of the land. A‘s remedy is to go

to court under Article 433.
Assuming that the possessor claiming the ownership is

illegitimate, can the true owner who is not in possession apply the
doctrine of self-help under Article 429?
The true owner must go to court. He cannot apply the doctrine of

self-help under Article 429 since he is not in possession.
What is the limitation of an owner in fencing or enclosing his

land tenement?
ARTICLE 430. “Every owner may enclose or fence his land or

tenements by means of walls, ditches, live or dead hedges, or by
any other means without detriment to servitudes constituted
thereon.”
In Lunod vs. Meneses (G.R. No. 4223 August 19, 1908), the owner
of the lower tenement created a structure impeding the flow of water
from the upper tenement to the lower tenements. Thus, the upper
tenements were flooded. The Supreme Court said that the owner of the
lower lands cannot erect works that will impede or prevent an easement
or charge constituted and imposed by the law upon his estate for the
benefit of the higher lands belonging to different owners; neither can the
latter do anything to increase or extend the easement. While Article 430
of the Civil Code authorizes every owner to enclose his estate by means of
walls, ditches fences or any other device, but his right is limited by the
easement imposed upon his estate.

What is the limitation of an owner in using his property?
ARTICLE 431. “The owner of a thing cannot make use thereof

in such a manner as to injure the rights of a third person.”
This is one of the fundamental bases of police power, and

constitutes a just restriction on the right of ownership.
Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas. This encapsulates everything

in the law on things.
What is the doctrine of state of necessity?
ARTICLE 432. “The owner of a thing has no right to prohibit

the interference of another with the same, if the interference is
necessary to avert an imminent danger and the threatened
damage, compared to the damage arising to the owner from the
interference, is much greater. The owner may demand from the
person benefited indemnity for the damage to him.”
This is also called the doctrine of incomplete privilege. The owner

cannot refuse interference by another if such interference is necessary to
avert an imminent danger and the threatened damage, compared to the
damage arising to the owner from the interference is much greater.
This is basically the same rule as Article 11, ¶4 of the Revised

Penal Code.
What is the distinction between acts in state of necessity and

defense against unlawful aggression or defense against dangerous
objects?
Acts in state of necessity are different from defense against

unlawful aggression or defense against dangerous objects, although the
principle which justifies them is the same. If the danger comes from
another’s property, and the force is employed against it, the case is
defense against danger. But if another’s property is used to avert danger
not arising from it, the act is essentially one in a state of necessity. In
other words, it is for the purpose of protecting the actor himself or
another person at the expense of the owner of the property who has no
part in the state of necessity.
The power to do an act in a state of necessity is given not only to

protect oneself but also others. The source of danger is immaterial. It is

necessary, however that the interference of another’s property be

indispensable to avert the threatened danger or damage.
B is running away from drug addicts. B passes a house and

smashes the door and is able to save himself. Are B’s actions
justified?
B‘s actions are justified. B is not guilty of malicious mischief since

B was trying to prevent injury to himself.
B is drunk and is singing while walking home. B passes J‘s

house who has a Doberman. The Doberman attacks B. B stabs the
Doberman with a Swiss army knife. Did B act under Article 432?
Does B have to pay?
Yes, B acted under Article 432. B does not have to pay because
the danger came from the property itself, the Doberman, and it was not
B‘s fault.
B sees a Doberman sleeping and starts shouting at the

Doberman. B kicks the dog. The dog attacks B. B stabs the dog. Is
B justified in killing the dog under Article 432? Does he have to
pay?
B is justified in killing the dog under Article 432 because B has a

right to defend himself. However, B has to pay J since B provoked the
dog.
What is the effect of mistake in an act done while in a state of

necessity?
If through error, one believed himself to be in a state of necessity,

or used means in excess of the requirements of the situation, his act
would be illicit, and the owner of the property can properly use against
him the defensive force authorized in Article 429.
What is the effect of negligence in an act done while in a state

of necessity?
The law does not require that the person acting in a state of
necessity be free from negligence in the creation of the situation. Thus, if
a person picks up an unknown object in a drug store and eats it,
thinking it to be a candy, and it turns out to be poison, he can lawfully
drink any antidote he may find in the store, even without the consent of
the owner.

What is the basis of liability for acts occasioned while in a

state of necessity?
The obligation to indemnify does not depend upon imputability.

Even a minor or incapacitated person must pay the damages occasioned
by the saving of himself or his property while in a state of necessity. The
basis of the liability is the benefit derived, similar to the reason for the
rule provided in Article 23 of the Code.
Is the right of self-help available against an act in a state of

necessity?
The right of self-help is not available against an act in a state of

necessity because there would be no unlawful aggression when a person
acts pursuant to a right.
What are the two disputable presumptions of ownership?
ARTICLE 433. “Actual possession under claim of ownership

raises disputable presumption of ownership. The true owner must
resort to judicial process for the recovery of the property.”
Article 433 applies when the plaintiff is not in possession of the

property.
What are the requisites in an action to recover property?
ARTICLE 434. “In an action to recover, the property must be

identified, and the plaintiff must rely on the strength of his title
and not on the weakness of the defendant's claim.”
What are the two things that must be proven in an accion

reinvidicatoria?
Two things that must be proven in an accion reivindicatoria are:
1. The identity of the property; and

2. The plaintiff‘s title to it.
What are the evidences which may be presented by the

plaintiff to show his ownership?
1. Torrens certificate;
2. Titles granted by the Spanish Government, like those effected by
royal cedula;
3. Long and actual possession;

4. Occupation of a building for a long time without paying rentals

therefor.
5. Testimony of adverse and exclusive possession of ownership
corroborated by tax declaration of properties, payment of taxes,
and deeds of mortgage.
What is the presumption in favor of the title of the possessor?
The possessor has a presumption of title, and unless the plaintiff

proves he has a better right, he cannot recover the property from the
defendant.
What are the essential requisites of eminent domain?
ARTICLE 435. “No person shall be deprived of his property

except by competent authority and for public use and always upon
payment of just compensation.
Should this requirement be not first complied with, the courts

shall protect and, in a proper case, restore the owner in his
possession.”
When can the State seize or condemn property?
ARTICLE 436. “When any property is condemned or seized by

competent authority in the interest of health, safety or security,
the owner thereof shall not be entitled to compensation, unless he
can show that such condemnation or seizure is unjustified.”
What is the basis of power of the State to seize and condemn

properties of private ownership?
The basis is police power of the State. Under police power, the
state deprives the individual of the property without just compensation.
Example: Pedro has a pair of socks which he has been wearing for
7 months. It is spreading numerous diseases. The state can take the
pair of socks to burn it. In doing so, there is no need for compensation.
However, if the state wants to do research on germ warfare, and the state
takes the socks of Pedro and its germs, the state should compensate
him.
What is the extent of the right of ownership of the owner of a

parcel of land?

ARTICLE 437. “The owner of a parcel of land is the owner of

its surface and of everything under it, and he can construct
thereon any works or make any plantations and excavations which
he may deem proper, without detriment to servitudes and subject
to special laws and ordinances. He cannot complain of the
reasonable requirements of aerial navigation.”
The right of the landowner extends to the space and the subsoil as
far as necessary for his practical interest, or to the point where it is
possible to assert his dominion; beyond these limits, he would have no
legal interest.
In Roman law there is an old saying, Cujus est solum, ejus est usque ad
coelum et ad inferos (the owner of a piece of land owns everything above
and below it to an indefinite extent). This is not true anymore.
Otherwise, airplanes would commit aerial trespass. However, it cannot
be denied that the landowner owns the land, the earth and the air.
Otherwise, his ownership is useless. Where do you draw the balance?
The property owner owns the space and subsoil as far as is necessary for
his practical interest and ability to assert dominion. Beyond this, the
owner has nothing. This would depend on a case to case basis.
Is the aerial space juridically considered a thing?
The aerial space is not juridically a thing susceptible of private

appropriation just like the open sea.
A is the owner of a parcel of land consisting of ten hectares.

What right does A have on the same?
He can make constructions, works, plantations and excavations.
Is the right of A in the problem above absolute? Why?
No, because it is subject to certain restrictions or limitations like

servitudes, special laws, ordinances, requirements of aerial navigation
and the principle of human relations. He cannot complain of the
reasonable requirements of aerial navigation.
Does it mean that if the owner of the land is the owner of

everything under it, he is the owner of the minerals found in the
land? Why?
No, because ownership of minerals is reserved in favor of the state

even if the land is a private land. In fact, he has no right to extract the
minerals without the permission of the state.

To whom does hidden treasure which is discovered belong?
ARTICLE 438. “Hidden treasure belongs to the owner of the

land, building, or other property on which it is found.
Nevertheless, when the discovery is made on the property of

another, or of the State or any of its subdivisions, and by chance,
one-half thereof shall be allowed to the finder. If the finder is a
trespasser, he shall not be entitled to any share of the treasure.
If the things found be of interest to science or the arts, the

State may acquire them at their just price, which shall be divided
in conformity with the rule stated.”
If you find treasure in your land, the treasure is yours. When a

person finds treasure in a land that is not his, ½ goes to the finder and
½ goes to the owner of the land, building or other property.
What is hidden treasure?
ARTICLE 439. “By treasure is understood, for legal purposes,

any hidden and unknown deposit of money, jewelry, or other
precious objects, the lawful ownership of which does not appear.
In order that the rule regarding the discovery of hidden

treasures by a stranger on property belonging to another may be
applied, what requisites must concur?
1. The treasure must consist of money, jewelry or other precious

objects;
2. It must be hidden and unknown (Article 439(;
3. There is no lawful owner (Article 438);
4. The discovery must be made by chance (Article 438); and
5. The discoverer must be a stranger and not a trespasser.
What does discovery by chance mean?
There is debate as to what chance means. One school of thought

thinks that chance means there was intent to find treasure except that
finding it was serendipitous. Another school of thought posits that the
finder should not have no intentions in the first place to look for
treasure.
Spanish commentators on the Civil Code tend to tell us that “by

chance” means there should be no purpose or intention to look for it.

The better rule, however, is that “by chance” means “good luck”,
whether there was a deliberated search or not for the treasure, but no
prior agreement as to how it is to be divided. One who intentionally looks
for it is embraced because if he does not ask for permission, he is a
trespasser.
Would a prehistoric tomb or buried city that is discovered

constitute hidden treasure?
A prehistoric tomb or buried city that is discovered would not

constitute a hidden treasure but the movables found in the tomb fall
within the terms of the law in defining treasure.
May a thing that had been considered lost by its owner, or if

he has already abandoned it, constitute hidden treasure?
A thing that had been considered lost by its owner, or if he has

already abandoned it, and third persons do not know of its existence,
becomes hidden treasure subject to the rules in Article 438.
Are the rules in Article 438 applicable if the treasure is found

in the walls of buildings?
The rules in Article 438 are applicable even if the treasure is found
in the walls of buildings. When the building and the land belong to two
different persons, each is considered separate from the other, and
property found in the building will belong to the owner of the building,
and that found in the land to the owner to the owner of the land,
completely or to the extent of one-half, as the case may be.
Who are considered strangers?
Anyone who has absolutely no right over the immovable or thing in

which the treasure is found, is deemed a stranger. The term also
includes a lessee, a usufructuary, or a paid laborer working for the
owner of the land, provided he has not been engaged precisely to look for
hidden treasure.
When there are several persons engaged in some work such as

digging or demolition, and hidden treasure is found, who is
considered the finder of the treasure?
When there are several persons engaged in some work such as

digging or demolition, and then hidden treasure is found, the finder is he
who actually discovered the treasure. The person who first brings to view
the hidden treasure, even in part, is the finder, although he may not take

material possession thereof. This rule applies even when there are others
working in association with him.
X found a hidden treasure inside the land of Y. How will the

treasure be divided if X is a usufructuary of the land; lessee; farmer;
laborer hired to look for it?
If X is a usufructuary, or lessee, or farmer, he is entitled to ½ of

the hidden treasure because they are considered as strangers to the
land.
If X is a laborer intended to look for it, he is entitled to his wage or

salary only.
What is the effect if the finder of the treasure conceals it from

the owner of the land?
If the finder of the treasure conceals it from the owner of the land
on which it is found, he does not merely lose his share, but he becomes
civilly and criminally liable for taking something not belonging to him,
which is the share of the landowner. He will also be responsible for all
the consequences of possession in bad faith with respect to the loss or
deterioration of the thing.
CHAPTER 2. – RIGHT OF ACCESSION

GENERAL PROVISIONS
What is accession?
ARTICLE 440. “The ownership of property gives the right by

accession to everything which is produced thereby, or which is
incorporated or attached thereto, either naturally or artificially.”
The law does not define accession. It merely tells us what

accession does. However, in the light of Article 440, accession may be
defined as the right by virtue of which the owner of a thing becomes the
owner of everything that it may produce or which may be inseparably
united or incorporated thereto, either naturally or artificially.
The equipment of a movie house, as accessories, follow the

ownership of the principal (Dy vs. Sacay, 165 SCRA 473).
Is accession a mode of acquiring ownership?
From the very definition itself, it is clear that it is not a mode of

acquiring ownership; it is merely a consequence of the right of

ownership; a mere concomitant right of ownership; a mere incident or

consequence of ownership. Article 712 of the Civil Code which
enumerates the different modes of acquiring ownership or other real
rights does not include accession.
What are the kinds of accession?
Accession may be divided into discreta and continua. The discreta

is the extension of the right of ownership to the products of a thing; while
the continua is the acquisition of ownership over a thing incorporated to
that which belongs to the owner.
The discreta has three divisions: natural fruits, industrial fruits

and civil fruits.
The continua may refer to immovable or to movables. The accession

as to immovable may consist of alluvium, force of river, change of river,
formation of islands, and building, planting or sowing. The accession as
to movables may be conjunction or adjunction; specification; and
conmixtion.
Adjunction may take place by inclusion; soldering (either

ferruminatio and plumbatura); weaving; painting and writing.
Definition and examples:
1. Accession discreta (to the fruits) - the right pertaining to the owner
of a thing over everything produced thereby (Article 442).
1) Natural fruits - the spontaneous products of the soil, and the

young and other products of animals.
2) Industrial fruits- those produced by lands of any kind through

cultivation or labor.
3) Civil fruits - the rents of buildings, the price of leases of lands

and other property and the amount of perpetual or life
annuities or other similar income. Stock dividends are civil
fruits being surplus profit.
2. Accession continua (attachment or incorporation) - the right

pertaining to the owner of a thing over everything that is
incorporated or attached thereto either naturally or artificially.
1) With reference to real property

a. Accession industrial (Article 445-456)
a) Building;
b) Planting; and
c) Sowing
b. Accession natural
a) Alluvium
b) Avulsion;
c) Change of course of rivers; and
d) Formation of Islands
2) With reference to personal property
(a) Adjunction or conjunction - the union of two things

belonging to different owners, in such a manner that they
cannot be separated without injury, thereby forming a
single object.
a) Inclusion (engraftment) – such as when a diamond

ring is attached to a gold right belonging to
another.
b) Soldadura or soldering (attachment) – such as

when an accessory object is fused to another
made of metal, like an arm or a foot of a statue
(1) Ferruminatio - when the objects are of the

same metal;
(2) Plumbatura – when the objects are of different
metals.
c) Tejido (weaving) – as when materials belonging to

different owners are used in weaving textile ;
d) Pintura (painting) – as when a painter uses his

own paint in board or canvas belonging to
another;
e) Escritura (writing) – as when a person writes on

paper or parchment belonging to another.
(b) Mixture –
a) confusion – mixture of liquids; and

b) conmixtion – mixture of things, solid or liquid

belonging to different owners.
(c) Specification - the giving of a new form to materials

belonging to another, such as when grapes belonging to
one person are converted to wine by another, or marble of
one person is made into a statue by another.
What is the basis of accession?
Accession discreta is based on principle of justice; it is only

just that the owner of a thing should also own whatever it
produces, unless there is some special reason for a contrary
solution.
On the other hand, accession continua is generally based on

necessity and utility, it being more practical that the owner of the
principal thing should own the new things instead of a co-
ownership being established.
What are the basic principles of the doctrine of

accession?
The doctrine of accession rests on the following basic

principles:
1. That to the owner of a thing belongs the extension or increase of

such thing;
2. That this extension of the right of ownership is realized, as a
general rule, under the juridical principle that the accessory
MEMORIZE THESE 3 follows the principal, accession cedit principali; or that the owner of
the latter acquires or extends his ownership over the former;
3. That this incorporation of the accessory with the principal, saving
the exceptions provided by law, is effected only when two things
are so united that they cannot be separated without injuring or
destroying the juridical nature of one of them.
4. unjust enrichment
Is a formal act necessary in order to subject the accessory to
one’s ownership?
The right in re to the principal is likewise a right in re to the

accessory, since the accessory follows the nature of the principal, and
there need not be any formal act of our will or manifestation of the
purpose to subject it to our ownership; it is subject thereto ipso jure from
the moment the mode of acquisition become evident.

SECTION 1. – RIGHT OF ACCESSION WITH

RESPECT TO WHAT IS PRODUCED BY PROPERTY
(ACCESSION DISCRETA)
What is accession discreta?
It is the right to the ownership of the fruits produced by one’s

property.
What is the juridical concept of fruits?
Juridically, fruits include all the products of or income of a thing,

in accordance with its economic purpose, so long as they do not bring
about any essential alteration thereof.
The word “fruits” is used in the law in a broad sense as “products”.

Hence, it includes vegetables.
As a general rule, to whom do fruits belong?
ARTICLE 441. “To the owner belongs:
(1) The natural fruits;

(2) The industrial fruits;
(3) The civil fruits.”
What are the exceptions to the general rule that fruits belong
to the owner?
The general rule is subject to the following exceptions:
1. If the thing is in the possession of a possessor in good faith in

which case such possessor is entitled to the fruits (Article 544);
2. If the thing is subject to a usufruct in which case the
usufructuary is entitled to the fruits (Article 566);
3. If the thing is leased, in which case the lessee is entitled to the
fruits of the thing, although such lessee must pay the owner
rentals which are in the nature of civil fruits (Article 1654);
4. If the thing is in the possession of an antichretic creditor in
which case such creditor is entitled to the fruits with the
obligation of applying them to the interest and principal (Article
2132). [Antichresis is a contract by virtue of which the creditor
acquires the right to receive the fruits of an immovable of his
debtor, with the obligation to apply them to the payment of
interest, if owing, and thereafter to the principal of his credit.]

What is the meaning of natural, industrial and civil fruits?
ARTICLE 442. “Natural fruits are the spontaneous products

of the soil, and the young and other products of animals.
Industrial fruits are those produced by lands of any kind

through cultivation or labor.
Civil fruits are the rents of buildings, the price of leases of

lands and other property and the amount of perpetual or life
annuities or other similar income.”
Natural fruits are those products of the soil in whose generation

human labor does not intervene, such as herbs which grow wild in the
mountains dedicated to pasturage.
Are trees adhering to the soil fruits?
They are not fruits in the juridical sense; they are themselves
immovable which may produce fruits. But under certain circumstances
they may be considered fruits, as when they are exploited for an
industry, in which case they are industrial fruits.
Are the young and other products of animals fruits?
The young and other products of animals are, without distinction,

classified as natural fruits. This ignores completely whatever care may be
given, even scientifically, by man in order to bring the improvement of
the stocks of animal.
B owns a male German Shepherd. M owns a female German

Shepherd. The two dogs breed. To whom does the litter go?
To the female since birth follows the womb (partus requites

ventreim).
A leased a female animal from B. During the period of the

lease, the animal produced sibling. Who owns the young?
A owns the young, because the contract of lease is onerous. It

should also be observed that by virtue of the contract of lease, the
general rule that the owner of the female is also the owner of the young
must give way.

Suppose that A was merely given the animal by way of

commodatum (gratuitous borrowing), who is the owner of the
young?
The owner of the female retains ownership in view of the gratuitous

contract.
If an owner of a piece of land mortgages such land to secure

the obligation of another, is the bonus paid to the latter to such
owner for undertaking the risk of mortgaging his property a civil
fruit of the mortgaged property?
No, because it is not income derived from the property itself, but a
compensation for the risk assumed for its owner.
What is the duty of the recipient of fruits to third persons who

incurred expenses in their production, gathering and preservation?
ARTICLE 443. “He who receives the fruits has the obligation
to pay the expenses made by a third person in their production,
gathering, and preservation.”
third party - not a party to a contract; not the owner, the agent,
etc.
Only those expenses that remain after paying the expenses for
kinds of their production, gathering and preservation can be considered as fruits.
expenses:
necessary
useful Note that the fruits referred to here are gathered fruits. Owner
luxurious
should pay for the expenses of cultivation, gathering and preservation
irrespective of good faith or bad faith to prevent unjust enrichment.
regardless of good faith or bad faith, the third person must be reimbursed.. (no unjust
enrichment) The rule is different with respect
to ungathered fruits. When the
possession is interrupted and in bad faith, no reimbursement is due
(Article 449 pursuant to the principle of accession continua).
only the necessary expenses are reimbursable.
What are the requisites in order that expenses may be

reimbursable under Article 443?
The expenses, to be reimbursable under Article 443 must have two

characteristics:
1. They must be dedicated to the annual production and not for the
improvement of the property;
2. They must not be unnecessary, excessive or for pure luxury but
must be of such an amount naturally required by the condition of
the work or the cultivation made.

If the expenses exceed the value of the fruits, must the owner
still pay the expenses?
Yes, because the law makes no distinction. He who is entitled to

the benefits must bear the risks and losses. The owner, may however,
permit the possessor to complete the harvesting and gathering of the
fruits in order that he may not have to pay the expenses.
If the fruits have not yet been gathered at the time the owner
recovers possession from a possessor in bad faith, does the owner
have to pay for production expenses?
art 443 in inapplicable because such article pertains to gathered
fruits.
No, the owner does not have to pay for the production expenses
because Article 449 clearly says that the possessor in bad faith loses that
which has been planted or sown, without right to indemnity whatsoever.
The fruits, still part of the immovable, pass to the owner of the land by
accession continua.
A is the owner of a piece of land upon fruits were grown,

raised, harvested and gathered by B in bad faith. Who should be
considered the owner of the fruits? Is B entitled to be reimbursed?
A should be considered the owner of the fruits since he is the

owner of the land, and B is a planter in bad faith but A must reimburse
B for the expenses for production, gathering and preservation. The
reason for reimbursing B even though he is in bad faith, is to that were it
not necessary cultivation expenses, there would not be any fruits grown
at all, or left or preserved. Thus Article 443 is merely in consonance with
the principle that no one may enrich himself unjustly at another’s
expense and makes no distinction as to good faith and bad faith. The
principle of accession continua does not apply in such a case because the
fruits have been separated from the immovable. Article 443 establishes a
general rule and Article 449 an exception.
What is the effect if the planter is in good faith and the

planter gathers the fruits?
It would seem that Article 443 does not apply when the planter is
in good faith, because in this case, he is entitled to the fruits already
received, hence there is no necessity of reimbursing him (See Article 544)
When are fruits considered as natural or industrial fruits?
ARTICLE 444. “Only such as are manifest or born are

considered as natural or industrial fruits.

With respect to animals, it is sufficient that they are in the

womb of the mother, although unborn.”
Fruits of plants which produce only a single crop and then perish
are deemed manifest or existing from the time the seedlings appear from
the ground without waiting for the grains to appear.
Fruits of plants and trees that live for years and give periodic fruits
are deemed to manifest or exist when the fruits actually appear on the
plants and trees.
Fruits of animals are deemed to exist at the maximum ordinary

period of gestations.
How are the rules for civil fruits distinguished from natural
and industrial fruits?
1. Civil fruits accrue daily (Article 554) and are therefore

considered in the category of personal property; natural and
industrial fruits, while still growing, are real property;
2. Civil fruits can be pro-rated; natural and industrial fruits
ordinary cannot.
SECTION 2. – RIGHT OF ACCESSION WITH RESPECT

TO IMMOVABLE PROPERTY
Who owns what has been built, planted or sown on the land of
another and the improvements or repairs made thereon?
ARTICLE 445. “Whatever is built, planted or sown on the land

of another and the improvements or repairs made thereon, belong
to the owner of the land, subject to the provisions of the following
articles.”
What is the scope of building in Article 445?
Building is used in its generic term which refers to all architectural

work with roof, built for the purpose used as man’s dwelling, or for
offices, clubs, theaters, etc. A warehouse is not a building (Philippine
Sugar Estate vs. Poizat, 48 Phil. 536).
What is the scope of planting in Article 445?

It is not necessary that the trees or plants should have taken root
as it is enough that’s they are planted in order to belong to the owner of
the land.
Who owns a tree growing on one estate but leaning almost

entirely over the adjoining estate?
The tree belongs to the owner of the land on which it grows. The
adjoining owner may have certain rights, such as, to demand that the
branches thereof be cut off as they extend over his property, and to cut
the roots himself if they extend into his land.
What are the basic principles in accession industrial?
a. If removal can be achieved without destruction, rules on

accession are inapplicable;
MEMORIZE! b. The accessory follows the principal;
c. The principles of unjust enrichment are generally applicable;
d. As against a person in good faith, one who is in bad faith not
only loses his rights but may be held liable for damages.
What are the two disputable presumptions if there are works,

sowing, and planting on a land?
ARTICLE 446. “All works, sowing, and planting are presumed

made by the owner and at his expense, unless the contrary is
proved.”
“All works” should be understood in its broad meaning so as to

include not only the constructions, improvement or repair of the building
but also all analogous work such as the placing of industrial machinery
therein.
If the landowner builds, plants or sows using the materials of

another, what are the rules?
ARTICLE 447. The owner of the land who makes thereon,

summary of art 447 personally or through another, plantings, constructions or works
I.
OB - Gf, owner of the with
land the materials of another, shall pay their value; and, if he
m - gf acted in bad faith, he shall also be obliged to the reparation of
rules: damages. The owner of the materials shall have the right to
remove them only in case he can do so without injury to the work
ob - right of appropriation
m - reimbursement
constructed, or without the plantings, constructions or works being
- limited right of removal
destroyed. However, if the landowner acted in bad faith, the owner
II.
ob - bf
of the materials may remove them in any event, with a right to be
m - gf indemnified for damages.
rules:
ob - n.r
m - right of reimbursement with damages By: Kathryn Pineda-Dela Serna
-absolute right of removal
1. If the owner of materials and the land owner are both in good faith:
1) The land owner shall pay for the value of the materials; or
2) The owner of the materials may remove them without injury
to the work constructed.
2. If the land owner is in bad faith and the owner of the materials is
in good faith:
1) The land owner shall pay for the value of the materials
plus damages; or
2) The owner of the materials can remove them whether or
not it destroys the work, with damages.
Will the owner of materials used by another become a part

owner of the thing constructed with his materials?
The owner of materials used by another does not become a part

owner of the thing constructed with his materials but is only entitled to
recover their value.
Can the owner offer to return the materials instead of paying

their value?
It is believed that he does not have this right because Article 447
does not give him any option except to pay for the value of the materials.
Besides, such materials acquire the condition of immovable and give rise
to a new thing with a distinct nature. But when the materials do not
enter into the construction as an element which suffers transformation
by reason of its use such as statue, ornaments and others of like nature
which can be removed without injury to the owner, the owner (builder,
planter or sower) can comply with his obligation by returning the
materials at his expense.
What is bad faith in the use of materials?
The law does not define what constitutes bad faith in the use of
materials belonging to another. Article 453 refers to bad faith of the
owner of the land while Article 526 refers to bad faith of a possessor in
reference to the land. By analogy to the latter, the builder, planter or
sower would be in bad faith with respect to the materials if he knew that
he had no right to make use of such materials. And by analogy to the
first Article, the owner of the materials would be in bad faith if such

materials were used by another in his presence with his knowledge and
forbearance and without opposition on his part.
What are the rules if the building, planting or sowing was done
in good faith on the land belonging to another who is also in good
faith?
ARTICLE 448. “The owner of the land on which anything has

both are in good faith
been built, sown or planted in good faith, shall have the right to
appropriate as his own the works, sowing or planting, after
payment of the indemnity provided for in articles 546 and 548, or
to oblige the one who built or planted to pay the price of the land,
and the one who sowed, the proper rent. However, the builder or
planter cannot be obliged to buy the land if its value is
considerably more than that of the building or trees. In such case,
he shall pay reasonable rent, if the owner of the land does not
choose to appropriate the building or trees after proper indemnity.
The parties shall agree upon the terms of the lease and in case of
disagreement, the court shall fix the terms thereof.”
1. The land owner has the right to appropriate the building,

planting or sowing after paying necessary and useful
expenses; or
2. To oblige the building or planter to pay the price of the

land and the sower to pay rent; except if the value of the
land is higher than the building or trees. In such case,
the landowner can oblige the builder or planter pay rent if
the owner does not choose to appropriate. In case the
parties cannot agree on the terms of the lease, the court
shall fix the terms.
The owner cannot refuse to exercise either option.
Would the rules under Article 448 apply if there is a

contractual relation between the parties?
Where there is a contractual relation between the parties, such as

lease of land, construction contract, usufruct, in which cases the
stipulations of the parties and the pertinent legal provisions shall apply.
Does Article 448 apply to a case where one co-owner has built,
planted or sown on the land owned in common?
No, Article 448 cannot be invoked by one co-owner against another

who builds, plants or sows upon their land, since the latter does not do

so on land not belonging to him. The co-owner is not a third person

under the circumstances and the situation is governed by the rules of co-
ownership.
Is Article 448 applicable to a tenant or lessee?
No, since the Civil Code supplies specific provisions to cover the
rights of a tenant or lessee. Besides, the tenant cannot be said to be a
builder, planter or sower in good faith as he has no pretension as owner.
Even with regard to ornamental expenses, the lessee shall not be entitled
to reimbursement but he may remove the ornamental objects provided
no damage is caused to the principal thing and the lessor does not
choose to retain them by paying their value at the time the lease is
extinguished.
What types of constructions are included in Article 448?
To fall within the provisions of Article 448, the construction must

be of a permanent character, attached to the soil with an idea of
perpetuity; but if it is of a transitory character or is transferrable, there is
no accession, and the builder must remove the construction. The proper
remedy of the landowner is an action to eject the builder from the land.
What is the meaning of good faith as applied to a builder,

planter or sower in Article 448?
Article 526 may be applied: “He is deemed a possessor in good

faith who is not aware that there exists in his title or mode of acquisition
any flaw which invalidates it.” Under Article 527: “Good faith is always
presumed, and upon him who alleges bad faith on the part of a possessor
rests the burden of proof.”
What is the right of the builder, planter or sower in good faith

while he has not been indemnified?
The builder, planter or sower in good faith has a right of retention

while he has not been indemnified. Until the indemnity which includes
necessary and useful expenses has been paid in full, the builder, planter
or sower has not only the retain the improvements but also the land on
which they have been built, planted or sown, the land being considered
meanwhile as an inherent part of the improvement.
During that time, the landowner does not own what has been built,
planted or sown, but he has only the option established by Article 448.
Neither of the parties may bring reindivicatory action against the other.

If the land owner chooses to compel the builder to pay for the
land, would the builder have the right of retention he fails to pay as
required?
In the event of such failure of the builder to pay after the

landowner has opted to sell the land, the builder will lose his right of
retention if he does not pay as required and the landowner is entitled to
removal of the improvement.
During the period of retention by the builder, planter or sower,

would he still be considered a possessor in good faith?
No, because he is already aware that the land is not his; and if he
receives fruits from the land, he is obliged to account for such fruits so
that the amount thereof may be deducted from the amount of indemnity
to be paid to him by the owner of the land (Mendoza vs. de Guzman, 52
Phil. 164).
If the building, planting or sowing done on the property has

caused the landowner some damage, either by impairing the
property or depriving him of the use thereof for more remunerative
purposes, and he does not want to part with the property, does the
landowner have the right to be compensated?
No, the landowner does not have the right to be compensated

because Article 448 does not give him such right and the rule given in
the said Article must be applied without exceptions based on equity;
provided that the builder, planter or sower has no fault or negligence, for
otherwise, he would be liable for quasi-delict under Article 2176.
Can the landowner file a suit for ejectment and pray for
demolition against the builder, planter or sower?
No, the landowner has yet to make a choice. If he has not yet done
so, he cannot ask for ejectment of the builder, planter or sower. But if he
opted to sell the land where the value of the same is not considerably
more than the value of the house, and the builder or planter does not
pay the land, then the builder or planter can be ejected (Ignacio vs.
Hilario, 76 Phil. 605). If he cannot pay, he should not be allowed to
continue using the land (Tayag vs. Yuseco, Apruil 16, 1959).
Suppose that the owner of the land should avail himself of the
second remedy provided for in Article 448 of the Civil Code –
compelling the builder in good faith to pay the value of the land –

but such builder fails to pay, does he become automatically the

owner of the builder?
Under Articles 448 and 546 of the Civil Code, the owner of the
land has the right to choose between appropriating the building by
reimbursing the builder the value thereof or compelling the builder to
pay for his land. Even this second right cannot be exercised if the value
of the land is considerably more than that of the building. In addition to
the right of the builder to be paid the value of his improvement, Article
546 gives him the corollary right of retention of the property until he is
indemnified by the owner of the land. There is nothing in the language of
these two articles which would justify the conclusion that upon the
failure of the builder to pay the value of the land, when such is
demanded by the landowner, the latter becomes automatically the owner
of the improvement under Article 445 (Filipinas Colleges, Inc, vs.
Timbang, G.R. Nos. L-12812-12813, Sept. 29, 1959).
What then is the remedy left to the owner of the land if the
builder fails to pay?
While the Civil Code is silent on this point, guidance may be

derived from decisions of the Supreme Court, thus: (1) In Miranda vs.
Fadullan, 51 O.G 6226, the Supreme Court said that the parties may
decide to leave things as they are and assume the relation of lessor and
lessee, and should they disagree as the amount of rental they can go to
the court to have the amount fixed. (2) Should the parties not agree to
assume the relation of lessor and lessee, another remedy is suggested in
Iganacio vs. Hilario 76 Phil. 605, wherein the Supreme Court ruled that
the owner of the land is entitled to have the improvement removed when
after having chosen to sell his land the builder in good faith fails to pay
for the same. (3) A further remedy is indicated in Bernardo vs. Bataclan,
66 Phil. 590, where the Supreme Court approved the sale of the land and
improvement in the public auction applying the proceeds thereof first to
the payment of the value of the land and the excess, if any, to be
delivered to the owner of the house in payment thereof (Filipinas
Colleges, Inc. vs. Timbang, supra).
If the landowner chooses to appropriate the building, can the

builder ask the owner of the land to sell it instead? Why?
No, because the option to appropriate the building or sell the land
belongs to the landowner. The only right of the builder in good faith is
the right of reimbursement, not to compel the owner of the land to sell
(Quemuel vs. Olaes, 1 SCRA 1159). The option is not to buy but to sell.
The option is given to the landowner because his right is older; and

because of the principle of accession, he is entitled to the thing attached

to his land.
May a lessee be a builder in good faith?
No. In Frederico Geminiano, et al., G.R. No. 120303, July 24, 1996,
it was held that lessees are not builders in good faith. They came into
possession of the lot by virtue of a contract. They are then estopped to
deny their landlord’s title, or to assert a better title not only in
themselves, but also in some third person while they remain in
possession of the leased premises and until they surrender possession t
the landlord.
Can the owner of the land remove the constructions?
Since removal is not one of the remedies bestowed upon him by

law, it would be available only if and when he chooses to compel the
builder to buy the land at a reasonable price, but if the latter does not do
so, his options are limited to (1) appropriating the building after payment
of proper indemnity; or (2) obliging the latter to buy the lot occupied by
the structure. He cannot exercise a remedy of his own liking (Tecnogas
Phils. vs. CA, G.R. No. 108894, February 10, 1997).
What are the rules when the builder, planter or sower is in bad
faith?
ARTICLE 449. “He who builds, plants or sows in bad faith on

the land of another, loses what is built, planted or sown without
right to indemnity.”
ARTICLE 450. “The owner of the land on which anything has

been built, planted or sown in bad faith may demand the
demolition of the work, or that the planting or sowing be removed,
in order to replace things in their former condition at the expense
of the person who built, planted or sowed; or he may compel the
builder or planter to pay the price of the land, and the sower the
proper rent.”
ARTICLE 451. “In the cases of the two preceding articles, the
landowner is entitled to damages from the builder, planter or
sower.”
ARTICLE 452. “The builder, planter or sower in bad faith is

entitled to reimbursement for the necessary expenses of
preservation of the land.”

The Articles 449 and 450 grant three alternative rights to the
landowner on which anything has been built, planted or sown in bad
faith:
1. To appropriate what has been built, planted or sown, without any

obligation to pay indemnity therefor plus damages; or
2. To ask the builder, planter or sower to remove what has been built,
planted or sown plus damages; or
3. To compel the builder or planter to pay the value of the land or the
sower the proper rent plus damages.
Is Article 449 applicable if the improvements are no longer

standing on the land?
No, because Article 449 is an application of the rule of accession;

thus it can apply only to improvements still standing on the land and
does not refer to products already harvested and gathered.
Is the planter or sower in bad faith entitled to be reimbursed

of the expenses for cultivation, harvesting and preservation?
The general rule under Article 443 (he who received the fruits is
obliged to pay for the expenses of their cultivation, harvesting and
preservation) makes an exception under Article 449 by virtue of the
principles of accession, that is, when the fruits are still ungathered and
form part of the land by accession, at the time the landowner recovers
possession, he is not obliged to pay the expenses of production to the
planter or sower in bad faith; because such landowner acquires the fruits
by accession.
But if at the time the landowner recovers possession, the fruits

have already been harvested or gathered, and the former possessor who
held the property in bad faith is ordered to deliver the fruits gathered to
the owner, then the rule of accession does not operate. The landowner
who receives such fruits already severed from the land must pay the
expenses for cultivation as provided by Article 443.
If the builder, planter or sower in bad has made expenses for

the preservation of the land itself, what is his right?
Yes, he is entitled to reimbursement for such expenses. He loses

the accessory or improvement but he is not deprived of his right to collect
what he has spent to preserve the principal.
What is the effect if both the landowner and the builder,

planter or sower are in bad faith?

ARTICLE 453. “If there was bad faith, not only on the part of
the person who built, planted or sowed on the land of another, but
also on the part of the owner of such land, the rights of one and
both are in bad faith the other shall be the same as though both had acted in good
apply the rules of art faith.
448
It is understood that there is bad faith on the part of the

landowner whenever the act was done with his knowledge and
without opposition on his part.”
When is a builder, planter or sower deemed in bad faith?
While Article 453, paragraph 2 defines bad faith on the part of the
landowner, it does not define bad faith on the part of the builder, planter
or sower. Nevertheless, it is understood that the latter acts in bad faith
when he build, plants or sows knowing that the land does not belong to
him and he has no right to build, plant or sow thereon.
Under the circumstances, if he builds, plants or sows upon the

land with the knowledge and forbearance and without opposition on the
part of the landowner, both parties act in bad faith and they will be
considered as if they were in good faith, and their rights determined
under Article 448.
What are the applicable rules if the landowner acted in bad

faith and the builder, planter or sower acted in good faith?
ARTICLE 454. “When the landowner acted in bad faith and

the builder, planter or sower proceeded in good faith, the
provisions of article 447 shall apply.”
Under Article 447, the owner of the land is considered as having

made the building, planting or sowing through the builder, planter or
sower, with materials belonging to the latter, and therefore he should pay
the value of the materials plus damages because of his bad faith.
What are the rights of the owner of the materials in good faith
if the landowner or the builder, planter or sower are either in good
faith or in bad faith?
ARTICLE 455. “If the materials, plants or seeds belong to a

third person who has not acted in bad faith, the owner of the land
shall answer subsidiarily for their value and only in the event that
the one who made use of them has no property with which to pay.

This provision shall not apply if the owner makes use of the
right granted by article 450. If the owner of the materials, plants
or seeds has been paid by the builder, planter or sower, the latter
may demand from the landowner the value of the materials and
labor.”
Article 466 deals solely with the right of the owner of the materials,
irrespective of the good or bad faith of the landowner and the builder,
planter or sower. The landowner is subsidiarily liable for the value of the
materials because he benefits from them, except when he makes use of
his right to compel the builder, planter or sower in bad faith to remove
the improvements under Article 450 in which case he is not subsidiarily
liable for the value of the materials.
If the owner of the materials acted in bad faith because his

materials were used with his knowledge or forbearance and without
opposition on his part, Article 449 applies, that is, he will lose his
materials without right to indemnity. It is the same as if he himself made
the building, planting or sowing because it was done with his tacit
consent.
If there was bad faith on the part of the owner of the

materials, landowner and the builder, planter or sower, will Article
455 apply?
Yes, Article 455 will apply because their right will be determined as
if all of them acted in good faith.
If the owner of the materials and the landowner acted in good

faith, and the builder planter or sower acted in bad faith, what are
the rules?
The landowner shall appropriate the improvement, then the owner

of the materials will have his action against the builder, planter or sower
for the value of the materials with damages and if the latter is insolvent,
the landowner will be subsidiarily liable for the value of the materials
only but not for damages which are generally chargeable against the
party in bad faith. If on the other hand the landowner elects to have the
improvements removed under Article 450, the materials will revert to
their owner, who will be entitled to damages from the builder planter or
sower.
Can good faith co-exist with negligence?

ARTICLE 456. “In the cases regulated in the preceding

articles, good faith does not necessarily exclude negligence, which
gives right to damages under article 2176.”
Summarized outline of accession industrial (continua) in

Articles 447 to 455:
O - Owner of land
B - Builder
M - Owner of materials
1. Article 447
a. OB – in good faith
M – in good faith
(a) OB - right of appropriation

(b) M - 1. right of reimbursement
2. limited right of removal
b. OB – in bad faith
M – in good faith
(a) OB- no right

(b) M- 1. right of reimbursement plus damages
2. absolute right of removal plus damages
2. Article 448
O - in good faith
BM - in good faith
1) O – 1. right of appropriation
2. right to demand price of land or rent
2) BM – 1. right of reimbursement of necessary

and useful expenses if O elects first option
2. right of retention if O elects first option
3. Articles 449-452
O - in good faith
BM - in bad faith
1) O – 1. Right of appropriation plus damages

2. Right to demand removal or demolition

plus damages
3. Right to demand price of land or rent plus
damages
2) BM - no right except reimbursement of

necessary expenses for preservation of land.
4. Article 453
O - in bad faith
BM - in bad faith
Same as Article 448:
1) O – 1. right of appropriation
2. right to demand price of land or rent
2) BM – 1. right of reimbursement of necessary

and useful expenses if O elects first option
2. right of retention if O elects first option
5. Article 454
O - in bad faith
BM - in good faith
Same as Article 447:
a. OB – in good faith
M – in good faith
1) OB - right of appropriation
2) M - 1. right of reimbursement
2. limited right of removal
2) OB – in bad faith
M – in good faith
(a) OB- no right
(b) M- 1. right of reimbursement plus damages
2. absolute right of removal plus damages
6. Article 455
a. O - in good or bad faith

B - in good or bad faith

(a) First determine the rights of O and B

(b) Then M can hold B primarily liable and O
subsidiarily liable, except under Article 450.
b. O - in good or bad faith

B - in good or bad faith
M - in bad faith
(a) First determine the rights of O and B

(b) Then with respect to M, apply Articles 449-452
since B shall be considered agent of M.
ACCESSION NATURAL
What are the forms of accession natural?
1. Alluvium (Article 457);

2. Avulsion (Article 459);
3. Change of course of rivers (Articles 461 – 462); and
4. Formation of islands (Articles 464 – 465).
Who owns the accretion gradually received by a land from the

effects of the current of waters?
ARTICLE 457. “To the owners of lands adjoining the banks of

rivers belong the accretion which they gradually receive from the
effects of the current of the waters.”
Article 457 applies only to lands adjoining banks of rivers. It does not
apply by analogy to lands adjoining all bodies of water. However, Article
84 of the Law of Waters applies the same principle to lakes, streams and
creeks.
What is alluvium?
Alluvium (or alluvio) is the soil deposited or added to (accretion) the

lands adjoining the banks of rivers, gradually received as an effect of the
current of the waters. By law, the accretion is owned by the owner of the
estate fronting the river bank (riparian owner).
Differentiate between alluvium and accretion.
Although often used synonymously in connection with Article 457,

there are technical differences between alluvium and accretion:

1. Accretion is the process whereby the soil is deposited, while

alluvium is the soil deposited on the estate fronting the river bank;
the owner of such estate is the riparian owner;
2. Accretion is a broader term because alluvium, strictly speaking,
applies only to the soil deposited on river banks. It is possible that
a soil deposit be made also on the banks of lakes. In this case,
although it is an accretion, it is not called alluvium, although the
rule as to ownership is the same.
What are the essential requisites of alluvium?
1. The deposit should be gradual and imperceptible (as a process);

2. The cause is the current of the river (and not due to works
expressly designed for the purpose);
3. The current must be that of a river (if a lake, the Spanish Law on
Waters must apply; if the sea, the deposit belongs to the State);
4. The river must continue to exist (otherwise, if the river disappears,
Articles 461 and not Article 457 should apply);
5. The increase must be comparatively little, and not, for example,
such as would increase the area of the riparian owner by over one
hundred fifty percent).
What is the rationale of the benefit granted to riparian

owners?
1. To compensate him for the loss he may suffer due to erosion or the
destructive force of the water and danger from floods;
2. To compensate him because the property is subject to
encumbrances and legal easements;
3. The interests of agriculture require that the soil be given to the
person who is in the best position to cultivate the same;
4. Since after all, it cannot be said with certainty from whom the soil
came, it may just as well be logically given to him who can best
utilize the property.
What should the riparian owner do so that the accretion will

belong to him?
Accretion operates ipso jure. It is not necessary that the riparian

owner should make an express act of possession, the accession being
automatically his the moment the soil deposit can be seen.
A house near a river was enclosed by a high wall which

protected the estate. Should alluvium immediately outside the wall
belong to the owner of the house?

No, the alluvium here does not belong to the owner of the house or
land because the reason why alluvium is allowed by law does not exist
here. The presence of the wall hardly makes possible any loss from the
waters that the estate may suffer. Hence, the alluvium cannot be given to
the owner of the estate.
Is it required that the riparian owner to perform an act of

possession to become the owner of the alluvial deposit?
If the riparian owner has title to the land, does that cover the
alluvial deposit? Why?
No, because there is a specific technical description of the land.

There must first be an independent application for registration of the
land added by accretion. (Grande vs. CA, June 30, 1962)
May the alluvial deposits be lost by prescription in favor of

another? Reasons.
Yes, because if it is not covered by a Torrens title. It can be lost by

prescription after 30 years. (Maximo Jagualing, ibid.)
X bought the land of Y in installment basis payable in 5 years.

Suppose there is an alluvial deposit, who owns the same? Why?
X, because he need not completely pay the land. Equitable and

beneficial title is enough. (Director of Lands vs. Rizal, Dec. 29, 1950)
The northeast portion of the land of X is bounded by the

Manila Bay. If there is an accretion formed, who owns the
accretion? Why?
The accretion belongs to the State, because it is an accretion on a

sea bank, Manila Bay being an inlet or an arm of the sea. (Heirs of
Emiliano Navarro vs. IAC, G.R. No. 68166, Feb. 12, 1997)
How about if the land adjoins the Laguna De Bay? Who owns
the accretion?
It belongs to the owner of the land adjoining it because Laguna De

Bay is a lake, the accretion on which belongs to the owner of the land
contiguous thereto. (Emiliano Navarro, ibid)
What is a bay?

It is an opening into the land where the water is shut in all sides
except at the entrance; an inlet of the sea, distinct from a river, a
bending or curbing of the shore of the sea or of lake. (Emiliano Navarro,
ibid)
If a public service construction is made on a river bank, is the

owner of the land be considered a riparian owner? Who will own the
accretion?
If a public service construction, like a railroad or a road, is made

on a river bank, it is evident that he owner of the land can no longer be
considered a riparian owner. Therefore, it is the government or the
railroad company which will own the accretion. Here, the strip of land
used is no longer the property of the former riparian owner.
If instead of a public construction, there is only an easement

for the benefit of navigation, floatage, fishing and salvage; will the
riparian owner have a right over the accretion?
If instead of a public service construction, there is only an

easement for the benefit of navigation, floatage, fishing and salvage, the
right of the riparian owner to the accretion subsists, because in
easements, the owner of the servient estate does not lose his ownership
over the portion occupied. It is believed that this principle remains even
if under the new civil Code, the last paragraph of Article 638 states “If it
is necessary for such purpose to occupy land of private ownership, the
proper indemnity shall first be paid.” Payment of the indemnity does not
extinguish ownership over the land.
If a pond or a lagoon is dried up because of the natural

decrease of the waters, does the owner of the estate adjoining the
said pond or lagoon acquire the land left dry?
ARTICLE 458. “The owners of estates adjoining ponds or

lagoons do not acquire the land left dry by the natural decrease of
the waters, or lose that inundated by them in extraordinary
floods.”
Article 458 is does not talk of accession. When a body of water

dries up, the owner of the adjoining estate does not own the dried up
land. There is no alluvion since soil was not deposited in the adjoining
estate. Similarly, if the land of the adjoining owner should be flooded,
such land does not become part of the public dominion if the flood will
subside.
Define avulsion

It is the process whereby the current of a river, creek, or torrent

segregates from an estate on its bank a known portion of land and
transfers it to another estate.
Avulsion is the removal of a considerable quantity of soil from one

estate and its annexation to another by the perceptible action of water.
Avulsion is a case of delayed accession (JBL Reyes).
What is the rule in avulsion?
ARTICLE 459. “Whenever the current of a river, creek or

torrent segregates from an estate on its bank a known portion of
land and transfers it to another estate, the owner of the land to
which the segregated portion belonged retains the ownership of it,
provided that he removes the same within two years.”
Distinguish between alluvium and avulsion.
ALLUVIUM AVULSION
The deposit of the soil here is Sudden or abrupt process may be
gradual. seen.
The soil cannot be identified. Identifiable or verifiable.
It belongs to owner of property to It belongs to owner from whose
which it is attached. property it was detached.
Supposed the detached portion is placed on top and not

merely alongside or adjacent to another’s land, will Article 459
apply?
In avulsion, it is essential that the detached portion be known or

identifiable. Therefore, mere placing on top will not make the article
inapplicable as long as identification is still possible. But if because of
some force, say, continuous rain, the two have so mixed with each other
that identification cannot take place, the article should not apply. In this
case, the principles of conmixtion or confusion should, it is believed,
apply.
Suppose the detached portion is not attached to another’s

land but simply is in the middle of the river, what rule applies?
Ownership still remains with the person from whom whose land it
had been detached as in Article 463.
What is the rule on uprooted trees?

ARTICLE 460. “Trees uprooted and carried away by the

current of the waters belong to the owner of the land upon which
they may be cast, if the owners do not claim them within six
months. If such owners claim them, they shall pay the expenses
incurred in gathering them or putting them in a safe place.”
Is there accession in the case of uprooted trees?
In the case of uprooted trees there is no accession.
What if the trees have been transplanted, will Article 460 still
apply?
Ownership still pertains to the person who lost the trees provided
that the claim was made properly.
What is the effect if a claim has been made within the six
month-period but the trees were not removed, can an action still be
filed afterwards for the recovery of the trees?
Yes, provided the action is brought within reasonable time and

within the period set by law for prescription of movable property. All that
Article 460 requires is claim and not removing.
Who owns an abandoned river bed?
ARTICLE 461. “River beds which are abandoned through the

natural change in the course of the waters ipso facto belong to the
owners whose lands are occupied by the new course in proportion
to the area lost. However, the owners of the lands adjoining the old
bed shall have the right to acquire the same by paying the value
thereof, which value shall not exceed the value of the area
occupied by the new bed.”
What requisites must concur in order that Article 461 to

apply?
1. The change must be sudden in order that the old river bed may be
identified;
2. The changing of the course must be more or less permanent, and
not temporary over-flooding of another’s land;
3. The change of the river bed must be a natural one, caused by
natural forces and not by artificial means;
4. There must be a definite abandonment by the government. (The
government must not take steps to bring the river to its old bed);

5. The river must continue to exist, that is, it must not completely dry
up or disappear (as the river bed would belong to public dominion).
The estates of A and B face each other and adjoin a river.

Later, the river bed was abandoned because of the natural change if
its courses. A new river bed was formed in the land of C. Who owns
the abandoned river bed?
C owns the entire abandoned river bed to compensate him for the
loss of the land now occupied by the new river bed.
NOTE: “In proportion to the area lost” has no application if only

one owner has lost; here, he gets the entire abandoned river bed. The
“proportion” applies when there are two or more owners who have lost a
portion of their lots; in this case, the entire abandoned bed will go to
them proportionately, that is, in proportion to the area each has lost.
Under Article 461, a river bed abandoned through natural

changes ipso facto belongs to the owners of lands through which the
new river traverses. Suppose the change was man-made, is the rule
applicable?
Yes, even if the change was man-made, the rule in Article 461
applies. In Baes vs. CA, G.R. No. 108065, July 6, 1993, if the riparian
owner is entitled to compensation for the damage to or loss of his
property due to natural causes, there is all the more reason to
compensate him when the change in the course of the river is effected
through artificial means.
Who owns new river bed which is formed by natural causes on

a private estate?
ARTICLE 462. “Whenever a river, changing its course by

natural causes, opens a new bed through a private estate, this bed
shall become of public dominion.”
The estate of A adjoins a river. Subsequently, the current of

the river divides itself into branches affecting A’s property. Who
owns the isolated piece of land or the island in the middle of the
divided river?
ARTICLE 463 “Whenever the current of a river divides itself

into branches, leaving a piece of land or part thereof isolated, the
owner of the land retains his ownership. He also retains it if a
portion of land is separated from the estate by the current.”

The Water Code provides:
Article 58. When a river or stream suddenly changes its course to

traverse private lands, the owners of the affected lands may not compel
the government to restore the river to its former be; nor can they restrain
the government from taking steps to revert the river or stream to its
former course. The owners of the lands thus affected are not entitled to
compensation for any damage sustained thereby. However, the former
owners of the new bed shall be the owners of the abandoned bed in
proportion to the area lost by each.
The owners of the affected lands may undertake to return the river
or stream to its old bed at their own expense; Provided, That a permit
therefor is secured from the Secretary of Public Works, Transportation
and Communication and works pertaining thereto are commenced within
two years from the change in the course of the river or stream.”
Who owns islands formed by unidentifiable accumulated

deposits?
ARTICLE 464. “Islands which may be formed on the seas

within the jurisdiction of the Philippines, on lakes, and on
navigable or floatable rivers belong to the State.”
ARTICLE 465. “Islands which through successive

accumulation of alluvial deposits are formed in non-navigable and
non-floatable rivers, belong to the owners of the margins or banks
nearest to each of them, or to the owners of both margins if the
island is in the middle of the river, in which case it shall be
divided longitudinally in halves. If a single island thus formed be
more distant from one margin than from the other, the owner of
the nearer margin shall be the sole owner thereof.”
Summary:
1. If formed on the sea –
a. If within the territorial waters or maritime zone or

jurisdiction of the Philippines, the State owns the island
(Article 464). This is patrimonial property.
b. If the island was formed outside of our territorial

jurisdiction, the first country to effectively occupy the island
owns it.

2. If formed on lakes, or navigable or floatable rivers, the State owns

the island. This is also patrimonial property.
3. If formed on non-navigable or non-floatable rivers -
a. If nearer in margin to one bank, owner of nearer margin is

sole owner.
a. If the island is formed in the middle of the river, it shall be
owned by the owners of both margins divided longitudinally
in halves.
What is the rule to follow if a new island is formed between the

older island and the bank?
In this case, the owner of the older island is considered a riparian

owner, and if the new island is nearer in margin to the older island, the
owner of the older island should be considered also the owner of the new
island.
SECTION 3. – THE RIGHT OF ACCESSION WITH

RESPECT TO MOVABLE PROPERTY
What are the types of accession with respect to movable

property?
1) Adjunction;
2) Mixture (conmixtion or confusion); and
3) Specification.
What is adjunction?
It is the process by virtue of which two movable things belonging to

different owners are united in such a way that they form a single object.
There is adjunction or conjunction when 2 movables are attached

to each other such that separation is impossible without injury. For
example, the paint of B is used on the canvass of C.
There are two parties here: the owner of the principal object and
the owner of the accessory.
What are the different kinds of adjunction?
1) Inclusion (Example: sapphire set on a ring);

2) Soldering (Example: joining legs made of lead to a body also made

of lead);
3) Escritura (or writing);
4) Pintura (or painting); and
5) Weaving
What is the basic rule in adjunction?
If separation is possible without injury, then the things must be

separated. If this is not possible, then apply the rules on adjunction or
conjunction.
What are the rules in case of adjunction?
Article 466. “Whenever two movable things belonging to

different owners are, without bad faith, united in such a way that
they form a single object, the owner of the principal thing acquires
the accessory, indemnifying the owner thereof for its value.”
When is a thing considered principal and when is it considered

accessory? What are the tests?
ARTICLE 467. “The principal thing, as between two things

incorporated, is deemed to be that to which the other has been
united as an ornament, or for its use or perfection.”
ARTICLE 468. “If it cannot be determined by the rule given in

the preceding article which of the two things incorporated is the
principal one, the thing of the greater value shall be so considered,
and as between two things of equal value, that of the greater
volume.
In painting and sculpture, writings, printed matter, engraving and
lithographs, the board, metal, stone, canvas, paper or parchment
shall be deemed the accessory thing.”
Summary of the rules:
1) The principal thing, as between two things incorporated, is deemed

to be that to which the other has been united as an ornament, or
for its use or perfection (Article 467).
2) If it cannot be determined by the foregoing rule which of the two
things incorporated is the principal one, the thing of greater value
shall be so considered (Article 468);
3) If both things have equal value, the principal is that of the greater
volume (Article 468);

4) In painting and sculpture, writings, printed matter, engraving and

lithographs, the board, metal, stone, canvas, paper or parchment
shall be deemed the accessory thing (Article 468).
What is the rule when there can be separation of the things

without injury? What is the rule if the accessory is more precious
than the principal?
ARTICLE 469. “Whenever the things united can be separated

without injury, their respective owners may demand their
separation.
Nevertheless, in case the thing united for the use,

embellishment or perfection of the other, is much more precious
than the principal thing, the owner of the former may demand its
separation, even though the thing to which it has been
incorporated may suffer some injury.”
What is the rule if the owner of the accessory is in bad faith?

What is the rule the owner of the principal thing acted in bad faith?
What is the rule if both acted in bad faith?
ARTICLE 470. Whenever the owner of the accessory thing has

made the incorporation in bad faith, he shall lose the thing
incorporated and shall have the obligation to indemnify the owner
of the principal thing for the damages he may have suffered.
If the one who has acted in bad faith is the owner of the
principal thing, the owner of the accessory thing shall have a right
to choose between the former paying him its value or that the thing
belonging to him be separated, even though for this purpose it be
necessary to destroy the principal thing; and in both cases,
furthermore, there shall be indemnity for damages.
If either one of the owners has made the incorporation with

the knowledge and without the objection of the other, their
respective rights shall be determined as though both acted in good
faith.
Summary of the four situations covered by Articles 466 and 470:
1. Both owner of the principal object and the owner of the

accessory are in good faith (Article 466) - The owner of the principal
object acquires the thing but he has the duty to indemnify the owner of
the accessory. However, the owner of the accessory has a right to

demand separation even though there may be damage if the accessory is

more valuable.
2. The owner of the principal object is in good faith and the owner
of the accessory is in bad faith - The owner of the accessory loses the
thing plus he is liable for damages (Article 470).
3. The owner of the principal object is in bad faith and the owner
of the accessory is in good faith - The owner of the accessory has to
options:
a. Demand the value of the accessory plus damages; or

b. Demand separation even if the principal will be destroyed
plus damages (Article 470, ¶2).
4. Owner of the principal object and the owner of the accessory

both are in bad faith - Treat as if both are in good faith (Article 453 by
analogy).
What is the rule if the consent of the owner of the materials

has not been obtained?
ARTICLE 471. Whenever the owner of the material employed

without his consent has a right to an indemnity, he may demand
that this consist in the delivery of a thing equal in kind and value,
and in all other respects, to that employed, or else in the price
thereof, according to expert appraisal.”
Sentimental value must also be considered (Article 475).
What is mixture?
It is the combination or union of materials where the respective

identities of the component elements are lost.
What are the two kinds of mixture?
1) Conmixtion – mixture of solids (i.e., the mixture of

rice of different varieties);
2) Confusion – mixture of liquids (i.e., mixture of
different gasoline).
What are the rules in case of mixture?
ARTICLE 472. “If by the will of their owners two things of the
same or different kinds are mixed, or if the mixture occurs by

chance, and in the latter case the things are not separable without
injury, each owner shall acquire a right proportional to the part
belonging to him, bearing in mind the value of the things mixed or
confused.”
ARTICLE 473. “If by the will of only one owner, but in good
faith, two things of the same or different kinds are mixed or
confused, the rights of the owners shall be determined by the
provisions of the preceding article.
If the one who caused the mixture or confusion acted in bad

faith, he shall lose the thing belonging to him thus mixed or
confused, besides being obliged to pay indemnity for the damages
caused to the owner of the other thing with which his own was
mixed.”
1) If the mixture is caused by the owner in good faith, or by the

will of both owners, or by chance (accident), or by a common
agent, then co-ownership results, each owner acquiring an
interest or right proportional to the value of his materials
(Article 472);
2) If the mixture is made by one owner in bad faith, then he loses
his material in favor of the other; and he is liable for damages
(Article 473, par. 2);
3) If both are in bad faith, they are considered to have acted in
good faith;
4) If by the will of only one owner, but in good faith, each owner
acquiring an interest or right proportional to the value of his
materials (Article 473, par. 1) [Same as Article 472]
5) If the mixture was caused by the negligence of one of the
parties, the party negligent is liable for culpa aquiliana and
should indemnify for damages (Article 2176). Note that good
faith does not necessarily exclude negligence (Article 456).
What is specification?
Specification is the giving of a new form to another’s material

through the application of labor where labor becomes the principal. The
material undergoes a transformation or change of identity.
Here there are two parties: the owner of the material and the
maker.
What are the rules in specification?

ARTICLE 474. “One who in good faith employs the material of

another in whole or in part in order to make a thing of a different
kind, shall appropriate the thing thus transformed as his own,
indemnifying the owner of the material for its value.
If the material is more precious than the transformed thing

or is of more value, its owner may, at his option, appropriate the
new thing to himself, after first paying indemnity for the value of
the work, or demand indemnity for the material.
If in the making of the thing bad faith intervened, the owner

of the material shall have the right to appropriate the work to
himself without paying anything to the maker, or to demand of the
latter that he indemnify him for the value of the material and the
damages he may have suffered. However, the owner of the material
cannot appropriate the work in case the value of the latter, for
artistic or scientific reasons, is considerably more than that of the
material.”
ARTICLE 475. “In the preceding articles, sentimental value

shall be duly appreciated.
1. If the worker (principal) is in good faith:

1) He appropriates the new thing;
2) But he must indemnify for the materials
Exception: If the material (accessory) is more precious than the

new thing or is more valuable, the owner of the material has an option:
1) To get the new thing but he pays for the work; or

2) To demand indemnity for the material.
2. If the worker is in bad faith, the owner of the material has an

option:
1) To appropriate the work without paying for the labor; or
2) To demand indemnity for the material plus damages.
Exception: The option of appropriation is not available if the value

of the resultant work is more valuable for artistic or scientific reasons.
Distinguish specification from mixture and adjunction.
Adjunction Mixture Specification

Involves at least two Involves at least two May involve only one
things things thing (may be more)
but form is changed
As a rule, accessory As a rule, co- As a rule, accessory
follows principal ownership results follows the principal
The things joined The things mixed or The new object retains
retain their nature confused may either or preserves the nature
retain or lose their of the original object
respective identities
Summary of the four situations covered in specification:
1. Both material owner and maker are in good faith – The maker
acquires the thing with the duty to indemnify the material owner (Article
474, ¶1). However, if the material is much more precious, then the
material owner has two options:
a. To appropriate the thing and pay the maker; or

b. To sell the material to maker.
2. Maker is in bad faith and the material owner is in good faith -

Material owner has two options (Article 470):
a. Appropriate the thing without indemnity to the maker plus

damages; or
b. Sell the material to the maker plus damages.
This option is not available if the value of the work is considerably

more than the material.
3. Maker is in good faith and the material owner is in bad faith –

The maker appropriates without the duty to pay the material owner plus
damages (Article 470 by analogy).
4. Maker and the material owner are both in bad faith - Treat both
in good faith (Article 453 by analogy).
CHAPTER 3. – QUIETING OF TITLE
ARTICLE 476. “Whenever there is a cloud on title to real

property or any interest therein, by reason of any instrument,
record, claim, encumbrance or proceeding which is apparently
valid or effective but is in truth and in fact invalid, ineffective,

voidable, or unenforceable, and may be prejudicial to said title, an

action may be brought to remove such cloud or to quiet the title.
An action may also be brought to prevent a cloud from being

cast upon title to real property or any interest therein.”
ARTICLE 477. “The plaintiff must have legal or equitable title

to, or interest in the real property which is the subject matter of
the action. He need not be in possession of said property.”
ARTICLE 478. “There may also be an action to quiet title or

remove a cloud therefrom when the contract, instrument or other
obligation has been extinguished or has terminated, or has been
barred by extinctive prescription.”
ARTICLE 479. “The plaintiff must return to the defendant all

benefits he may have received from the latter, or reimburse him for
expenses that may have redounded to the plaintiff's benefit.”
What is the scope of an action to quiet the title to property or

to remove a cloud thereon?
The scope of an action to quiet the title to property or to remove a

cloud thereon is a remedy or form of proceeding originating in equity
jurisprudence, which has for its purpose an adjudication that a claim of
title to or an interest in property, adverse to that of the complainant, is
invalid, so that the complainant and those claiming under him may be
forever afterward free from any danger of the hostile claim.
What is a cloud on a title?
A cloud on title is an outstanding instrument, record, claim,

encumbrance or proceeding which is actually invalid or inoperative, but
which is actually invalid or inoperative, but which may nevertheless
impair or affect injuriously the title to property.
If an instrument is invalid or inefficacious on its face, may an

action to remove cloud on title prosper?
No, in such a case, an action to remove cloud on title does not

exist.
The matter complained of must have a prima facie appearance of

validity or legal efficacy. The cloud on title is a semblance of title which
appears in some legal form but which is in fact unfounded. The invalidity

or inoperativeness of the instrument is not apparent on the face of such

instrument, and it has to be proved by extrinsic evidence.
Cite illustrations of a cloud removable by action.
The following have been held to constitute cloud removable by

action:
1. A title or lien which appears to have been procured by fraud,

deceit, or misrepresentations;
2. A forged instrument;
3. Unauthorized or prohibited conveyances or encumbrances by
incapacitated persons;
4. Taxes levied on exempt property, and apparently valid tax sales
and conveyances of such property;
5. A conveyance which is executed by one whose title to the property
had been divested (this rule is applied not only in the case of two
successive conveyances by the same grantor, but also to a
conveyance which is junior to a mortgage or other lien under which
the real owner has acquired title);
6. A grant which is shown to have been subject to a condition
precedent, where it appears that the condition has not been
performed;
7. A tax sale or a tax deed which is invalid by reason of the prior
payment of the taxes in question;
8. A contract of sale which has been rescinded or forfeited as a result
of the purchaser’s abandonment of the contract or by his default in
performance; and
9. A conveyance by one who after the execution of the deed was
declared insane, there having been no lucid interval from a date
anterior to the conveyance.
What are the reasons for allowing the action to quiet title?
The reasons for which equity interferes to remove a cloud on title

are:
1. The prevention of eventual litigation;

2. The protection of the true title and possession; and
3. The promotion of the real interest of both parties, and of right and
justice, which require that the precise state of the title be known.
What are the requisites in order that an action may be brought

to remove the cloud or to quiet the title to real property or any
interest therein?

1) The plaintiff must have a legal or equitable title to, or interest in

the real property which is the subject matter of the action (Article
477).
The Civil Code also allows one out of possession to maintain

an action against a defendant in possession (Tan vs. Valdehuesa,
66 SCRA 61).
2) There must be a cloud on such title (Article 476).
3) Such cloud must be due to some instrument, record, claim,

encumbrance or proceeding which is apparently valid or effective
but in truth and in fact invalid, ineffective, voidable or
unenforceable, and is prejudicial to the plaintiff’s title (Article 476).
The matter complained of must have a prima facie

appearance of validity or legal efficacy.
4) When the contract, instrument or other obligation has been

extinguished or has terminated, or has been barred by extinctive
prescription (Article 478).
Example: An instrument has become functus oficio.
5) The plaintiff must return to the defendant all benefits he may have
received from the latter, or reimburse him for expenses that may
have redounded to his benefit (Article 479).
This is pursuant to the maxim “he who seeks equity must do

equity.”
6) The cloud on title must be one which the applicant has not created
and is under no personal obligation to discharge or remove.
What are the kinds of action referred to in Article 476?
1. Remedial – an action to remove the cloud or to quiet title.
2. Preventive – an action to prevent a future cloud or doubt –

action que timet.
The court has not only the power to remove existing cloud,
but also the power to prevent the casting of a cloud on the title
to property. Relief is granted if the threatened or anticipated
cloud is one which if it existed, would be removed by suit to

quiet title; thus the court will retrain a defendant from

proceeding with an illegal act which if completed will necessarily
cast a cloud upon plaintiff’s title.
What is the difference between an action to quiet title and a

suit to remove a cloud?
1. An action to quiet title, strictly considered, is substantially an

action for the purpose of putting an end to vexatious litigation in
respect to the property involved. An action to remove a cloud is
intended to procure the cancellation, delivery of, release of an
instrument, encumbrance, or claim constituting a claim on
plaintiff’s title, and which may be used to injure or vex him in the
enjoyment of his title.
2. In an action to quiet title, the plaintiff asserts his own estate and
declares generally that defendant claims some estate in the land,
and call on the defendant to set forth the nature of his claim, so
that it may be determined by decree; while in a suit to remove a
cloud, plaintiff not only declares his own title, but also avers the
source and nature of defendant’s claim, points out its defect, and
prays that it be declared void.
What is the nature of the action to quiet title?
Suits to quiet title are not technically suits in rem nor are they,
strictly speaking, in personam, but being against the person in respect to
the res, wherein the decree does not extend beyond the property in
controversy, these proceedings acquire a status that may be
characterized as quasi in rem since it is an action in personam
concerning real property.
Since the action is one ‘in personam’ and not ‘in rem’, the result is
not binding upon the whole world. It is enforceable only against the
defeated party, or privies.
What is the difference between an accion publiciana and

quieting of title?
Like accion publiciana, the action involves only real property and is
either curative or preventive. However, unlike in accion publiciana,
quieting of title applies to both ownership and possession. In quieting of
title, the complaint must allege the existence of an apparently valid or
effective instrument or other claim which is in reality void, ineffective,
voidable or unenforceable.

May there be an action to quiet title or remove a cloud in

personal properties?
No, because the law says “real property or any interest therein.”
But by analogy, the same principle should apply to personal property,
particularly vessels, which although movable, partake of the nature of
real property.
There are, however, special types of property, like corporate stock

and vessels, which are personal property, but because of the presence of
registries for their transfers they may be treated to some extent in the
same manner as real property. The same may be said of other personal
property affected by registered chattel mortgages. As to these, the
provisions and principles on quieting of title and removing clouds are, by
analogy, perfectly applicable.
Does the action to quiet title prescribe?
1) If the plaintiff is in possession of the property, the action does not

prescribe.
When the plaintiff is in possession of the subject property, the

action, being in effect that of quieting of title to the property, does not
prescribe (Valientes vs. Ramas, et al., G.R. No. 157852, December 15,
2010).
The reason for this is that one who is in actual possession of a

piece of land claiming to be the owner thereof may wait until his
possession is disturbed or his title is attacked before taking steps to
vindicate his right, the reason for the rule being, that his undisturbed
possession gives him a continuing right to seek the aid of a court of
equity to ascertain and determine the nature of the adverse claim of a
third party and its effect on his own title, which right can be claimed only
by one who is in possession (DPB vs. CA, 331 SCRA 267 [2000]).
As long as a person is in possession of the property, it is presumed

that the person in possession is the owner. The burden is on the
challenger to prove otherwise. The first sentence of Article 433 is similar
to Article 541 (A possessor in the concept of owner has in his favor the
legal presumption that he possesses with a just title and he cannot be
obliged to show or prove it.).
2) If the plaintiff is not in possession of the property, the action may

prescribe. Moreover, even if the action is brought within the period

of limitations, it may be barred by laches where there is no excuse

offered for the failure to assert title sooner.
Aside from being given the right to remove or prevent cloud, he

may also bring the ordinary actions of ejectment, publiciana or
reinvidicatoria within the proper prescriptive period.
When the plaintiff in the action is not in possession of the subject

property, the action prescribes in ten years from the date of registration
of the deed or the date of the issuance of the certificate of title over the
property (Valientes vs. Ramas, et al., G.R. No. 157852, December 15,
2010).
Thus, an action for reconveyance of a parcel of land based on

implied or constructive trust prescribes in ten years (Article 1456,10
Article 1144,11 and Section 53, paragraph 3 of Presidential Decree No.
152912). The point of reference is the date of registration of the deed of
the date or the issuance of the certificate of title over the property (Vda.
de Portugal vs. IAC, 159 SCRA 178). But this rule applies only when the
plaintiff is not in possession of the property, since if a person claiming to
be the owner thereof is in actual possession of the property, the right to
seek reconveyance, which in effect seeks to quiet title to the property,
does not prescribe (Olviga vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 104813 October
21, 1993).
The law thereby creates the obligation of the trustee to reconvey

the property and the title thereto in favor of the true owner. Correlating
Section 53, paragraph 3 of Presidential Decree No. 1529 and Article 1456
of the Civil Code with Article 1144 (2) of the Civil Code, supra, the
prescriptive period for the reconveyance of fraudulently registered real
property is ten (10) years reckoned from the date of the issuance of the
10
Art. 1456. If property is acquired through mistake or fraud, the person
obtaining it is, by force of law, considered a trustee of an implied trust for the benefit of
the person from whom the property comes.
11
Article 1144. The following actions must be brought within ten years from the
time the right of action accrues:
1) Upon a written contract;
2) Upon an obligation created by law;
3) Upon a judgment;
xxxxxxxxx
12 Section 53, paragraph 3, Presidential Decree No. 1529: In all cases of
registration procured by fraud, the owner may pursue all his legal and equitable
remedies against the parties to such fraud without prejudice, however, to the rights of
any innocent holder of the decree of registration on the original petition or application, x
x x.

certificate of title (Vda de Gualberto, et al., vs. Go, et al., G.R. No. 139843,
July 21, 2005).
3) If the ground is fraud and not based on implied or constructive

trust, the prescriptive period is 4 years (Guerrero v. Court of
Appeals, 126 SCRA 109,118).
Thus, an action for reconveyance of real property resulting from

fraud must be filed within four (4) years from the discovery of the fraud
(Balbin v. Medalla, 108 SCRA 666; Alarcon v. Bidin, 120 SCRA 390). Such
discovery must be deemed to have taken place when the defendant was
issued the certificate of title because registration is considered a
constructive notice to the whole world of its contents, and all interests,
legal and equitable, included therein (Ramos v. Court of Appeals, 112
SCRA 542).
4) In actions for reconveyance of property is predicated on the fact

that the conveyance complained of was null and void ab initio, a
claim of prescription of action would be unavailing. The action or
defense for the declaration of the inexistence of a contract does not
prescribe (Heirs of Romana Ingjug-Tiro v. Casals, G.R. No. 134718,
20 August 2001, 363 SCRA 435).
In case of conflict between the Civil Code and the principles of

the general law on the subject, which should prevail?
ARTICLE 480. “The principles of the general law on the

quieting of title are hereby adopted insofar as they are not in
conflict with this Code.”
What are the defenses available to the defendant?
1. Equitable as well as legal defenses.

2. Acquisition of the title to the property by adverse possession.
3. Prior adjudication under the rule of res judicata.
What rules govern the procedure for quieting or title and

removal of cloud?

ARTICLE 481. “The procedure for the quieting of title or the

removal of a cloud therefrom shall be governed by such rules of
court as the Supreme Court shall promulgate.”
CHAPTER 4
RUINOUS BUILDINGS AND TREES
IN DANGER OF FALLING
ARTICLE 482. “If a building, wall, column, or any other

construction is in danger of falling, the owner shall be obliged to
demolish it or to execute the necessary work in order to prevent it
from falling.
If the proprietor does not comply with this obligation, the

administrative authorities may order the demolition of the
structure at the expense of the owner, or take measures to insure
public safety.”
ARTICLE 483. “Whenever a large tree threatens to fall in

such a way as to cause damage to the land or tenement of another
or to travelers over a public or private road, the owner of the tree
shall be obliged to fell and remove it; and should he not do so, it
shall be done at his expense by order of the administrative
authorities.”
What is the rule in case of building etc. in danger of falling?
1) The owner thereof is obliged to demolish it or execute the

necessary work in order to prevent it from falling (Article 482, Par.
1);
2) If the proprietor does not comply with this obligation, the
administrative authorities may order the demolition of the
structures at the expense of the owner, or take measures to insure
public safety (Article 482, par. 2);
What is the liability of the proprietor if his building or

structure totally or partially collapses?

If the construction or structures fall, the owner would be liable for

damages based on quasi-delict if it should be due to the lack of
necessary repairs (Article 219013).
However, the person who suffers damages as a result of the

collapse of a building should proceed against the engineer, architect or
contractor who built the structure if the collapse was due to the latter’s
fault (Article 219214 and Article 172315).
What is the rule with respect to large trees about to fall?
1) The owner of the tree is obliged to fell and remove it;

2) If he should not do so, it shall be done at his expense by order of
the administrative authorities (Article 483).
What is the liability of proprietors for falling of trees situated

at or near highways or lanes?
Proprietors shall be responsible for damages caused by the falling

of trees situated at or near highways or lanes, if not caused by force
majeure (Article 219116).
13 Art. 2190. The proprietor of a building or structure is responsible for the
damages resulting from its total or partial collapse, if it should be due to the lack of
necessary repairs.
14 Art. 2192. If damage referred to in the two preceding articles should be the
result of any defect in the construction mentioned in Article 1723, the third person
suffering damages may proceed only against the engineer or architect or contractor in
accordance with said article, within the period therein fixed.
15
Art. 1723. The engineer or architect who drew up the plans and specifications
for a building is liable for damages if within fifteen years from the completion of the
structure, the same should collapse by reason of a defect in those plans and
specifications, or due to the defects in the ground. The contractor is likewise
responsible for the damages if the edifice falls, within the same period, on account of
defects in the construction or the use of materials of inferior quality furnished by him,
or due to any violation of the terms of the contract. If the engineer or architect
supervises the construction, he shall be solidarily liable with the contractor.
Acceptance of the building, after completion, does not imply waiver of any of the
cause of action by reason of any defect mentioned in the preceding paragraph.
The action must be brought within ten years following the collapse of the
building.
16 Art. 2191. Proprietors shall also be responsible for damages caused:

TITLE III. CO-OWNERSHIP
ARTICLE 484. “There is co-ownership whenever the ownership

of an undivided thing or right belongs to different persons.
In default of contracts, or of special provisions, co-ownership shall
be governed by the provisions of this Title.”
Define co-ownership.
It is the right of common dominion which two or more persons

have in a spiritual (ideal or aliquot) part of a thing, not materially or
physically divided.
Co-ownership is not a real right distinct from ownership, but a

mere form or manifestation of ownership.
What governs co-ownership?
a. Contracts
b. Special legal provisions
c. Provisions of the Title on Co-ownership
What are the sources of co-ownership?
1) The law, like party walls, fences, hedges and party ditches, and in
the legal conjugal partnership.
2) Contracts.
3) Fortuitous event or chance like commixtion, confusion, hidden
treasure.
4) Occupation or occupancy, such as when two persons catch a wild
beast or gather forest products.
5) Succession or will.
(1) By the explosion of machinery which has not been taken care of with due
diligence, and the inflammation of explosive substances which have not been kept in a
safe and adequate place;
(2) By excessive smoke, which may be harmful to persons or property;
(3) By the falling of trees situated at or near highways or lanes, if not caused by
force majeure;
(4) By emanations from tubes, canals, sewers or deposits of infectious matter,

constructed without precautions suitable to the place.

Distinguish tenancy in common from joint tenancy.
TENANCY IN COMMON JOINT TENANCY

(CO-OWNERSHIP)
1. This involves a physical whole. 1. This also involves a physical
But there is an ideal (abstract) whole. But there is no ideal
division; each co-owner being the division; each and all of them own
owner of his own ideal share. the whole thing.
2. Each co-owner may dispose of 2. Each co-owner may not dispose
his ideal or undivided share of his own share without the
(without boundaries) without the consent of all the rest, because he
other’s consent. really has no ideal share.
3. If a co-owner dies, his share goes 3. If a joint-tenant dies, his share
to his own heirs. goes by accretion to the other joint-
tenants by virtue of their
survivorship or jus accrecendi.
4. If a co-owner is a minor, this 4. If one joint-tenant is under a
does not benefit the others for the legal disability (like minority), this
purpose of prescription, and benefits the other against whom
prescription therefore runs against prescription will not run.
them.
What are the characteristics of co-ownership?
1. Plurality of subjects, who are the co-owners;

2. Unity of or material indivision. There is one physical whole
divided into ideal (undivided) shares;
3. The recognition of ideal shares, which determines the rights and
obligations of the co-owners. Each ideal share is definite in
amount, but not physically segregated from the rest;
4. Regarding the physical whole, each co-owners must respect
each other in the common use, enjoyment, or preservation of
the physical whole (Article 483);
5. Regarding the ideal share, each co-owner holds almost absolute
control over the same (Article 493);
6. It is not a juridical person; and
7. A co-owner is in a sense a trustee for the other co-owners.
Distinguish co-ownership from ordinary partnership.
CO-OWNERSHP ORDINARY PARTNERSHIP

1. No legal personality. 1. Has legal or juridical personality.
2. Created by contract or by other 2. Created by contract only,
things. express or implied.

3. Purpose is for collective 3. Purpose is profit.

enjoyment.
4. Agreement for it to exist is valid 4. There is no term limit set by law.
only for 10 years.
5. As a rule, there is no mutual 5. As a rule, there is mutual
representation. representation.
6. Not dissolved by death or 6. Is dissolved by the death or
incapacity of co-owner incapacity of a partner.
7. Can dispose of his share without
7. Cannot substitute another as
consent of others partner in his place without the
consent of the others.
8. Profits must always depend on 8. Profits may be stipulated upon.
proportionate shares.
Distinguish co-ownership from conjugal partnership.
CO-OWNERSHIP CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP

1. May arise by an ordinary 1. Arises only because of the
contract. marriage contract.
2. Sex of the co-owners is 2. One must be male, the other
immaterial. female.
3. Co-owners may be 2 or more. 3. Conjugal owners are always two.
4. Profits are proportional to 4. Profits are generally 50-50
respective interest. unless a contrary stipulation is in a
marriage settlement.
5. Death of one does not dissolve 5. Death of either husband or wife
the co-ownership. dissolves the conjugal partnership.
6. Generally all the co-owners 6. Generally, the husband is the
administer. administrator.
7. Co-ownership is discouraged. 7. Encouraged by law to provide for
better family solidarity.
What is the relationship of each co-owner to the other co-

owners?
In co-ownership, the relationship of such co-owner to the other co-

owners is fiduciary in character and attribute. Whether established of
law or by agreement of the co-owners, the property or thing por-indiviso
is impressed with a fiduciary nature so that each co-owner becomes a
trustee for the benefit of his co-owners and he may not do any act
prejudicial to the interest of his co-owners.
How is the share of the co-owners in the benefits and charges

arising from the co-ownership determined?

ARTICLE 485. “The share of the co-owners, in the benefits as

well as in the charges, shall be proportional to their respective
interests. Any stipulation in a contract to the contrary shall be
void.
The portions belonging to the co-owners in the co-ownership

shall be presumed equal, unless the contrary is proved.”
A co-owner’s share in the fruits and expenses is always dependent

on the co-owner’s interest. Any agreement to the contrary is void.
What is the effect of accretion added to any portion of land

owned in common?
The effect of accretion added to any portion of land owned in

common becomes part of the property in co-ownership.
Eddard makes a will. He gives a farm to Robb, Bran and

Rickon in equal shares. However, the will states that the sharing in
fruits and expenses in not equal. Robb gets 80%, Bran gets 15%,
and Rickon 5%. Is this valid?
This is a debatable point. Some commentators say it is valid since

Article 485 refers to contractual agreements. Some commentators argue
that it is not valid. Although Article 485 refers to contractual agreements,
it should extend to other sources of co-ownership since Article 485 is an
expression of public policy.
What are the rights of a co-owner regarding his ideal share?
1) Full ownership of his part and share of fruits or benefits;

2) The right to alienate, assign or mortgage his share;
3) The right to substitute another in his enjoyment, except when
personal rights are involved (Article 493);
4) He right to exempt himself from necessary expenses or taxes by
renouncing part of his interest in the co-ownership. (Art. 488)
What are the limitations upon the right of a co-owner to use

the thing owned in common?
ARTICLE 486. Each co-owner may use the thing owned in

common, provided he does so in accordance with the purpose for
which it is intended and in such a way as not to injure the interest
of the co-ownership or prevent the other co-owners from using it
according to their rights. The purpose of the co-ownership may be
changed by agreement, express or implied.

The thing held in common must be used only:
1. In accordance with the purpose for which it is intended;

2. In such a way as not to injure the interest of the co-ownership; and
3. In such a way as not to prevent the other co-owners from using it
according to their rights (Article 486).
A co-owner can use the entire physical unit. For example, a co-
owner uses the entire car, not just a portion of the car. A co-owner does
not have to pay rent for the use of the thing co-owned.
How do you determine the purpose for which the co-ownership

is intended?
To determine the purpose for which the property is intended, the

agreement, express or implied, of the parties should govern. In default of
such agreement, it is understood that the thing is intended for that use
for which it is ordinarily adapted according to its nature, or the use to
which it has been previously devoted.
Two sisters own in common a two-story building. The first

floor is being rented out to third persons. The second floor is being
occupied by one sister for dwelling purposes. The other sister lives
in Spain. A portion of the first floor is being occupied by the
husband of the sister who lives in the second floor as his office.
Does the sister occupying the second floor and her husband who is
occupying a portion of the first floor have to pay rent?
In Pardell vs. Bartolome (23 Phil. 450), it was held that the sister
occupying the second floor need not pay rent. The fact that she used the
whole second floor is irrelevant. She did not prejudice the rights of her
sister in Spain precisely because she was in Spain. But with respect to
the first floor which was occupied by the husband of the sister, the
husband should pay his sister-in-law ½ of the rent for such portion.
Otherwise, his sister-in-law would be prejudiced.
Jon, Edd and Bowen are the co-owners of a house being rented
by Sam. May Jon alone sue Sam for ejectment? Why?
ARTICLE 487. “Any one of the co-owners may bring an action

in ejectment.”
The reason for the rule is that an action instituted by one is really
in behalf of all.

What are the actions covered by the term ejectment?
a. Forcible entry
b. Unlawful detainer
c. Accion publiciana
d. Accion reindivicatoria
e. Quieting of title
f. Replevin
Article 487 is a case where one co-owner can bind the other. The
other instance is Article 489 (obligation to reimburse a co-owner for
necessary repairs).
Can Article 487 be availed of in an action by any co-owner

against another co-owner?
The action by any co-owner allowed in Article 487 may be brought,

not only against third persons, but even against another co-owner who
takes exclusive possession and asserts ownership in himself alone,
however, the only effect of the action will be to obtain recognition of the
co-ownership; the defendant cannot be excluded because as co-owner he
has a right to possess, and the plaintiff cannot recover any material or
determinate part of the property.
Robb, Sansa, Arya, Bran and Rickon are co-owners of a lot

which is being squatted. Robb files an ejectment suit and wins. All
the other co-owners benefit. Do the other co-owners share in the
expense?
Yes, one can argue that it’s a necessary expense.
Cersei, Jaime and Tyrion are co-owners of a lot which is being

squatted. Cersei files an ejectment suit and loses. May the other
sue for ejectment?
No, because it is barred by prior judgment.
Mance, Tormund and Rattleshirt bought a book on credit.

They are co-owners of a book. In an action by the creditor against
the co-owners, may the creditor sue just one of the co-owners?
No, the creditor must sue all. Article 487 contemplates a situation
when it is the co-owner who files the suit and not when they are the
defendants.

What is the right of a co-owner as to the expenses for

preservation of the property owned in common? How may a co-
owner exempt himself from this obligation?
ARTICLE 488. “Each co-owner shall have a right to compel

the other co-owners to contribute to the expenses of preservation of
the thing or right owned in common and to the taxes. Any one of
the latter may exempt himself from this obligation by renouncing
so much of his undivided interest as may be equivalent to his share
of the expenses and taxes. No such waiver shall be made if it is
prejudicial to the co-ownership.”
Expenses for the preservation of the thing owned in common as

well as taxes must be shouldered by every co-owner in proportion to their
interest.
A co-owner has two options: (1) Pay for the necessary expenses or
taxes; or (2) Forfeit so much of his share equivalent to his interest to the
co-owner who paid for the necessary expenses or taxes
What does the reimbursement cover?
Only necessary expenses like those for the preservation of the

property and not for useful improvements, even if the value of the
property is thereby increased, the purpose of the co-ownership not being
for profit.
What is the remedy against a defaulting co-owner?
The co-owner who made the advance has a right of reimbursement.

The advancing co-owner has only the right to require payment. He may
not demand the share of the co-owner. His failure does not in itself
amount to a renunciation of any portion of his share in the co-
ownership. Neither can he be compelled to renounce, because
renunciation is a voluntary and free act.
What does the renouncing require?
The renunciation must be expressly made; a tacit renunciation

cannot produce any effect.
If the renouncing is in favor of the creditor, said creditor must give

his consent. If the renouncing is in favor of the other co-owners, a
novation would result, necessitating the consent of said co-owners and
the creditor.

How is the extent of the portion to be renounced to be

determined?
It is necessary to appraise all the property in co-ownership,

determine the value of the interest of the debtor co-owner therein, and
the renunciation must refer to a portion of that value equivalent to his
share in the expenses and taxes.
At what time should the property be appraised in order to

determine the portion that should be renounced?
The value at the time of renunciation must be the basis for the
appraisal.
Must the other co-owners consent to the renunciation?
Since the renunciation refers to a portion equivalent in value to the

share of the renouncing co-owner in an existing debt, it is only logical
that the other co-owners who must shoulder the debt of the renouncer in
exchange for the portion being renounced, should consent to his partial
renunciation. They must agree on the valuation of the portion being
renounced, because it is given to them in reimbursement for what they
have paid or will pay on an existing obligation. The Code however is
silent on the necessity of consent.
Must creditors consent to the renunciation?
If the creditor is a co-owner, his consent can be implied from his

acceptance of the renunciation. But if the creditor is a third person, his
consent must be given, otherwise, the transfer of the liability to the co-
owners may be binding upon the latter but never upon the creditor who
may still sue the renouncing co-owner for his share in the existing debt
for expenses of preservation.
May one of the co-owners undertake repairs for preservation

by himself?
ARTICLE 489. “Repairs for preservation may be made at the

will of one of the co-owners, but he must, if practicable, first notify
his co-owners of the necessity for such repairs. Expenses to
improve or embellish the thing shall be decided upon by a majority
as determined in article 492.”
Repairs for preservation may be made at the will of one of the co-
owners. As much as possible, notice should be given to the other co-

owners. The lack of notice only gives rise to the presumption that the
repairs were not necessary. However, this can be proven otherwise.
Article 489 is a case where one co-owner can bind the other. The
other instance is Article 487.
Useful or ornamental expenses need a majority. Majority is

computed not by counting heads but by majority of the controlling
interest in the co-ownership.
Selmy is a co-owner of a real property with Jorah and

Daenerys. The said property was sold to Daario with a right to
repurchase. Only Selmy exercised the right to repurchase and
obtained a title over the property. Did his act of repurchase
terminate the co-ownership?
No, and it did not give him title to the entire land subject of co-
ownership. The right of repurchase may be exercised by a co-owner with
respect to his share. When he acquired the whole property, he merely
acquired the right to be reimbursed for the amount equivalent to the
shares of Jorah and Daenerys. (Paulmitan vs. CA, GR No 61584, Nov. 25,
1992)
Roose, Ramsay and Walder are co-owners of a parcel of land.

Roose was able to register the land under his name. What is the
effect of the registration under his name?
He does not acquire exclusive ownership over the property (Ceniza

vs. CA, L-46345, Jan. 30, 1990). The registration merely created a trust
in favor of his co-owner (Article 1452).
Eddard, Benjen and Lianna are co-owners of a real property,

which was mortgaged to Catelyn. Eddard, redeemed it during the
period of redemption with his personal funds. Did Eddard become
the sole owners of the property, thereby terminating the co-
ownership?
No, because the redemption did not vest Eddard the sole
ownership over the said property but inured to the benefit of all co-
owners. Redemption is not a mode of terminating a co-ownership
(Mariano vs. CA, GR No. 101522, May 28, 1993).
Jojen , Meera and Hogor are co-owners of a parcel of land.

Jojen sells his aliquot part of the property without the consent of
the other. Is the sale valid?

Yes, it is valid because the right of alienation is one of his rights

over the ideal share in the co-ownership.
If Jojen sells the whole property without the consent of the

others, is the sale valid?
The sale is valid only insofar as his share is concerned. A person

cannot sell that which he does not own.
How do you consider the possession by a co-owner of the

property subject of co-ownership?
It is like that of a trustee and shall not be regarded as adverse to

the co-owners, but In fact beneficial to all of them. Acts, which may be
considered adverse to strangers, may not be adverse insofar as co-
owners are concerned (Salvador vs. CA, GR No. 109910, April 5, 1995).
Oberyn, Doran and Quentyn are co-owners of an agricultural

land. Oberyn is the administrator of the property. He wants to
convert it to a subdivision. What requirement is necessary before he
can do so and before he can recover expenses?
In order that a can make alterations, there must be unanimous

consent of all the co-owners, unless there is a judicial order obtained to
the contrary. Unanimous consent may be given impliedly. But for the one
making alterations to recover expenses, express consent must be given
(Javier vs. Javier, 6 Phil. 493).
What are the rules in perpendicular co-ownership?
ARTICLE 490. “Whenever the different stories of a house

belong to different owners, if the titles of ownership do not specify
the terms under which they should contribute to the necessary
expenses and there exists no agreement on the subject, the
following rules shall be observed:
(1) The main and party walls, the roof and the other things
used in common, shall be preserved at the expense of all the
owners in proportion to the value of the story belonging to each;
(2) Each owner shall bear the cost of maintaining the floor of
his story; the floor of the entrance, front door, common yard and
sanitary works common to all, shall be maintained at the expense
of all the owners pro rata;

(3) The stairs from the entrance to the first story shall be
maintained at the expense of all the owners pro rata, with the
exception of the owner of the ground floor; the stairs from the first
to the second story shall be preserved at the expense of all, except
the owner of the ground floor and the owner of the first story; and
so on successively.”
Proportionate contribution is required for the preservation of (1)

the main walls; (2) the party walls; (3) the roof; and (4) the other things
used in common. Each floor owner must bear the expenses of his floor;
while the stairs are to be maintained from story to story, by the users.
Most condominiums are corporations. If the condominium is a co-

ownership, then the provisions of the Civil Code are relevant.
Important Sections of the Condominium Law (RA 4726 as

amended by R.A. No. 7899
1. §2 – Definition:
Sec. 2. A Condominium is an interest in real property consisting of

a separate interests in a unit in a residential, industrial or commercial
building or in an industrial estate and an undivided interests in common,
directly and indirectly, in the land, or the appurtenant interest of their
respective units in the common areas.
The real right in condominium may be ownership or any interest in

real property recognized by law on property in the Civil Code and other
pertinent laws.
2. §4 – Enabling or master deed (contents and necessary

requirements) (amended):
Sec. 4. The provisions of this Act shall apply to property divided or

to be divided into condominium only if there shall be recorded in the
Register of Deeds of the province or city in which the property lies, and
duly annotated in the corresponding certificate of title of the land, if the
latter had been patented or registered under either the Land Registration
or Cadastral Acts, an enabling or master deed which shall contain, among
others, the following:
a) Description of the land on which the building or buildings and

improvements are to be located;
b) Description of the building or buildings, stating the number of

stories and basement, the number of units and their accessories, if any;

c) Description of the common areas and facilities;
d) A statement of the exact nature of the interest acquired or to be

acquired by the purchased in the separate units and the common areas of
the condominium projects. Where title to or to appurtenant interests in the
common areas is to be held by a condominium corporation, a statement to
this effect shall be included;
e) Statement of the purposes for which the building or buildings and

each of the units are intended or restricted as to use;
f) A certificate of the registered owner of the property, if he is other

than those executing the master deed, as well as of all registered holders
of any lien or encumbrances on the property, that they consent to the
registration of the deed;
g) The following plans shall be appended to the deed as integral

parts thereof:
1. A survey plan of the land included in the project, unless a

survey plan of the same property had previously been filed in said
office.
2. A diagrammatic floor plan of the building or buildings each

unit, its relative location and approximate dimensions.
h) Any reasonable restriction not contrary to law, morals, or public

policy regarding the right of any condominium owner to alienate or dispose
off his condominium.
The enabling or master deed may be amended or revoked upon
registration of an instrument executed by a simple majority of the
registered owners of the property: Provided, That in a condominium project
exclusively for either residential or commercial use, simple majority shall
be on a per unit of ownership basis and that in the case of mixed use,
simple majority shall be on a floor area of ownership basis: Provided,
further, That prior notifications to all registered owners are done: and
Provided, finally, That any amendment or revocation already decided by a
simple majority of all registered owners shall be submitted to the Housing
and Land Use Regulatory Board and the city/municipal engineer for
approval before it can be registered. Until registration of a revocation, the
provisions of this Act shall continue to apply to such property (As amended
by R.A. No. 7899).
3. §5 – What transfer of ownership includes (includes citizenship

requirements):

Sec. 5. Any transfer or conveyance of a unit or an apartment, office

or store or other space therein, shall include the transfer or conveyance of
the undivided interest in the common areas or in a proper case, the
membership or share holdings in the condominium corporation: Provided,
however, That where the common areas in the condominium project are
held by the owners of separate units as co-owners hereof, no condominium
unit therein shall be conveyed or transferred to persons other than Filipino
citizens or corporation at least 60% of the capital stock of which belong to
Filipino citizens, except in cases of hereditary succession. Where the
common areas in a condominium project are held by a corporation, no
transfer or conveyance of a unit shall be valid if the concomitant transfer of
the appurtenant membership or stockholding in the corporation will cause
the alien interest in such corporation to exceed the limits imposed by
existing laws.
4. §6 – Incidents of condominium grant:
Sec. 6. Unless otherwise expressly provided in the enabling or

master deed or the declaration of restrictions, the incidents of a
condominium grant are as follows:
a) The boundary of the unit granted are the interior surfaces of the
perimeter walls, floors, ceiling, windows and doors thereof: Provided, that
in the case of an industrial estate condominium projects, wherein whole
buildings, plants or factories may be considered as unit defined under
section 3 (b) hereof, the boundary of a unit shall include the outer surfaces
of the perimeter walls of said buildings, plants or factories. The following
are not part of the unit: bearing walls, columns, floors, roofs, foundations,
and other common structural elements of the buildings; lobbies, stairways,
hall ways and other areas of common use, elevator equipment and shafts,
central heating, central refrigeration and central air conditioning
equipment, reservoir, tanks, pumps and other central services and
facilities, pipes, ducts, flues, chutes, conduits wires and other utility
installations, wherever located, except the outlets thereof when located
within the unit.
b) There shall pass with the unit, as an appurtenant thereof, an

exclusive casement for the use of the air space encompasses by the
boundaries of the unit as it exists at any particular time and as the unit
may lawfully be altered or reconstructed from time to time. Such easement
shall be automatically terminated in any air space upon destruction of the
units as to render it untenantable.
c) Unless otherwise provided, the common areas are held in

common by the holders of units, in equal share one for each unit.

d) A non-exclusive easement for ingress, egress and support

through the common areas in appurtenant to each unit and the common
areas are subject to such easement.
e) Each condominium owner shall have the exclusive right to paint,

repaint, tile, wax, paper or otherwise refinish and decorate the inner
surfaces of the walls, ceilings, floors, windows and doors hounding his
own unit: provided, that in the case of an industrial estate condominium
unit, such right may be exercised over the external surfaces of the said
unit.
f) Each condominium owner shall have the exclusive right to

mortgage, pledge or encumber his condominium and to have the same
appraised independently of the other condominium owner.
g) Each condominium owner has also the absolute right to sell or

dispose of his condominium unless the master deed contains a
requirement that the property be first offered to the condominium owners
within a reasonable period of time before the same is offered to outside
parties.
5. §8 – When partition is allowed:
Sec. 8. Where several persons own condominium in a condominium

project, an action may be brought by one or more such person for partition
thereof, by sale of the entire project, as if the owners of all the
condominium in such project were co-owners of the entire project in the
same proportion as their interests in the common areas: Provided,
however, that a partition shall be made only upon a showing:
a) That three years after damage or destruction to the project which
renders a material part thereof unfit for its use prior thereto, the project
had not been rebuilt or repaired substantially to its state prior to its
damage or destruction; or
b) That damage or destruction to the project has rendered one half

or more of the units therein untenantable and that condominium owners
holding in aggregate more than 30 percent interest in the common areas
are opposed to the repair or restoration of the projects; or
c) That project has been in existence in excess of 50 years, that it is

obsolete and uneconomical, and that condominium owners holding in
aggregate more than 50 percent interest in the common areas are opposed
to repair or restoration or remodeling or modernizing of the project; or
d) That the project or a material part thereof has been condemned or

expropriated and that the project is no longer viable, or that the

condominium owners holding in aggregate more than 70 percent interest in

the common areas are opposed to the continuation of the condominium
regime after expropriation or condemnation of a material proportion
thereof; or
e) That the condition for such partition by sale set forth in the
declaration of restrictions duly registered in accordance with the terms of
this Act, have been met.
6. §9 – Declaration of restrictions:
Sec. 9. The owner of a project shall, prior to the conveyance of any

condominium therein, register a declaration or restrictions, relating to such
project, which restrictions shall ensure to a bind all condominium owners
in the project, such liens, unless otherwise provided, may be enforced by
any condominium owner in the project or by the management body of such
project.
The Register of Deeds shall enter and annotate the declaration of

restrictions, upon the Certificate of Title covering the land included within
the proper, if the land is patented or registered under the Land
Registration or Cadastral Acts.
Such declaration of restrictions, among the other things, may also

provide:
a) As to management body
1. For the power thereof, including power to enforce the provisions of

the declarations of restrictions;
2. For the maintenance of insurance policies insuring condominium

owners against loss by the, casualty, liability, workmen's compensation
and other insurable risks and for bonding of the members of any
management body;
3. Provisions for maintenance, utility, gardening and other services

benefiting the common areas for the operations of the building, and legal,
accounting and other professional and technical services;
4. For purchase of materials, supplies and the like needed by the

common areas;
5. For payment of taxes and special assessment which would be a

lien upon the entire project or common areas, for discharge of my
encumbrance levied against the entire project of the common areas;

6. The manner for delegation of its powers;
7. For reconstruction of any portion or portions of any damage to or

destruction of the project;
8. For entry by its officers and agents into any unit when necessary
in connection with the maintenance or construction for which such body is
responsible;
9. For a power of attorney to the management body to sell the entire

project for the benefit of all of the owners thereof when partition of the
project may be authorized under Section 8 of this Act, which said power
shall be binding upon all of the condominium owners regardless or
whether they assume the obligations of the restrictions or not.
b) The manner and procedure for amending such restrictions,

provided, that the vote of not less than a majority in interest of the owners
is obtained;
c) For independent audit of the accounts of the management body;
d) For reasonable assessments to meet authorized expenditures,

each condominium unit to be assessed separately for its share of such
expenses in proportion (unless otherwise provided) to its owner's fractional
interest in any common areas;
e) For the subordination of the liens securing such assessments to

other lien either generally or specifically described;
f) For conditions, other than those provided for in Sections 8 and 13

of this Act, upon which partition of the project and dissolution of the
condominium corporation may be made. Such right to partition or
dissolution may be conditioned upon failure of the condominium owners to
rebuild within a certain period or upon specified percentage of damage to
the building, or upon a decision of an arbitration, or upon any other
reasonable condition.
7. §10 – Condominium corporation:
Sec. 10. Whenever the common areas in a condominium project are

held by a condominium corporation, such corporation shall constitute the
management body of the project. The corporate purposes of such a
corporation shall be limited to the holding of the common areas; either the
ownership of any other interest in real property recognized by the law, to
the management of the project, and to such other purposes as maybe

necessary, incidental or convenient to the accomplishment of said

purposes. The articles of incorporation or by laws of the corporation shall
not contain any provision contrary to or inconsistent with the provision of
this Act, the enabling or master deed, or the declaration of restrictions of
the project, membership in a condominium corporation regarding of
whether it is stock or non-stock corporation, shall not be transferable
separately from the condominium unit of which it is an appurtenance.
When a member or a stockholder ceases to own a unit in the project in
which the condominium corporation owns or holds the common area, he
shall automatically cease to be a member or stockholder of the
condominium corporation.
8. §13 – Judicial dissolution of condominium corporation:
Sec. 13. Until the enabling or the master deed of the project in which
the condominium corporation owns or holds the common areas is revoked
the corporation shall not be voluntarily dissolved through an action for
dissolution under Rule 104 of the Rules of Court except upon a showing:
a) The three years after damage or destruction to the project in

which damage or destruction renders a materials part thereof unfit for its
use prior thereto, the project has not been rebuilt or repaired substantially
to its state prior to its damage or destruction; or
b) The damage or destruction to the project has rendered one half or

more of the units therein untenantable and that more than 30 percent of
the member of the corporation entitled to vote, if a stock corporation, are
opposed to the repair or reconstruction of the project; or
c) That the project has been in existence excess of 50 years, that it

is obsolete and uneconomical and that more than 50 percent of the
members of the corporation if non-stock or stockholders representing more
than 50 percent of the capital stock entitled to vote, if a stock corporation,
are opposed to the repair or restoration or remodeling or modernizing of the
project; or
d) That project or material part thereof has been condemned or

expropriated and that the project is no longer viable or that the members
holding in aggregate more than 70 percent interest in the corporation if
non-stock, or the stockholders representing more than 70 percent of the
capital stock entitled to vote, if a stock corporation, are opposed to the
continuation of the condominium regime after expropriation or
condemnation of a material portion thereof; or
e) That the conditions for such dissolution set forth in the
declaration of restrictions of the project in which the corporation owns or
holds the common areas, have been met.

9. §14 – Voluntary dissolution of condominium corporation

(amended):
Sec. 14. The condominium corporation may also be dissolved by

the affirmative vote of all the stockholders or members thereof at a general
or special meeting duly called for such purpose: Provided, That all the
requirements of Section 62 of the Corporation Law are complied with.
10.§16 – Disposition of common areas:
Sec. 16. A condominium corporation shall not, during its existence,

sell, exchange, lease or otherwise dispose of the common areas owned or
held by it in the condominium project unless authorized by the affirmative
vote of a simple majority of the registered owners: Provided, That prior
notification to all registered owners are done; and Provided further, That
the condominium corporation may expand or integrate the project with
another upon the affirmative vote of a simple majority of the registered
owners, subject only to the final approval of the Housing Land Use
Regulatory Board. (As amended by R. A. No. 7899)
What are the rules in acts of alteration of the thing held in

common?
ARTICLE 491. “None of the co-owners shall, without the

consent of the others, make alterations in the thing owned in
common, even though benefits for all would result therefrom.
However, if the withholding of the consent by one or more of the co-
owners is clearly prejudicial to the common interest, the courts
may afford adequate relief.”
In order to make alterations, the consent of all co-owners is

needed.
However, if the withholding of the consent by one or more of the

creditors is clearly prejudicial to the common interest, the court may
intervene and afford adequate relief.
What is meant by act of alteration?
Alteration is the act by virtue of which a co-owner, in opposition to

the common agreement, if there is any, or, in the absence thereof, to the
tacit agreement of all the co-owners, and violating their will, changes the
thing from the state in which the others believe it should remain, or
withdraws it from the use to which they desire it to be intended.

An alteration is an act of strict ownership (i.e. any act of

encumbrance) or one which involves a change in the use of the thing (i.e.
bought Toyota Altis to carpool and then decide to rent it out).
Article 491 refers to alterations or transformations which change

the essence and nature of the thing; they require unanimous consent of
all the co-owners.
May the consent for alterations be given impliedly?
Yes, but only for the purpose of making the alteration legal. Thus
of a co-owner knows that a house is being constructed on land owned in
common but offers no objection thereto, he cannot demand the
demolition of the building. But implied or tacit consent is not enough to
make the other co-owners liable for the expenses for the construction of
the house. To recover a share of the expenses, the express consent of the
others would be needed.
Robert, Stannis and Renly are co-owners of an agricultural

land. Robert is the administrator of the property. He wants to
convert it to a subdivision. What requirement is necessary before he
can do so and before he can recover expenses? Explain.
In order that A can make alterations, there must be unanimous

consent of all the co-owners, unless there is a judicial order obtained to
the contrary. Unanimous consent may be given impliedly. But for one
making alterations to recover expenses, express consent must be given
(Javier vs. Javier, 9 Phil. 493).
What are the effects of illegal alteration?
1) The co-owner responsible may lose what he has spent;

2) Demolition can be compelled;
3) He would be liable for losses and damages;
4) But whatever benefits the co-ownership derives will belong to it;
5) In case a house is constructed on common land, all the co-owners
will be entitled to a proportionate share of the rent.
What are the rules in acts of administration of the thing held

in common?
ARTICLE 492. “For the administration and better enjoyment

of the thing owned in common, the resolutions of the majority of
the co-owners shall be binding.

There shall be no majority unless the resolution is approved

by the co-owners who represent the controlling interest in the
object of the co-ownership.
Should there be no majority, or should the resolution of the

majority be seriously prejudicial to those interested in the property
owned in common, the court, at the instance of an interested party,
shall order such measures as it may deem proper, including the
appointment of an administrator.
Whenever a part of the thing belongs exclusively to one of the

co-owners, and the remainder is owned in common, the preceding
provision shall apply only to the part owned in common.”
Acts of administration need a majority. Majority is computed not

by counting heads but by majority of the controlling interest in the co-
ownership.
An example of an act of administration is replacing the tires of a

car owned in common with another brand of tires.
Acts of administration covered by this article have the following

characteristics: (1) that they refer to the enjoyment and preservation of
the thing; and (2) that they have transitory effects.
Even alterations which do not affect the substance or form of the

thing would fall under this article.
What are acts of administration or management?
1. That do not involve an alteration;

2. Those that may be renewed form time to time;
3. Those which have transitory effects, that is, do not bind the co-
ownership for a long time in the future;
4. Those, which even if called alteration, do not affect the substance
or nature of the thing; and
5. Those for the common benefit of all the co-owners and not for only
one or some of them.
What are the limitations on the right of the financial

majority?
1. Although they can approve resolutions for administration and

better enjoyment, still before a decision is made, there should first
be a notice to the minority so that they can be heard;

2. The majority would be justified in proceeding only when the

urgency of the case and the difficulty of meeting with them render
impracticable the giving of such notice;
3. The minority may appeal to the court against the decision of the
majority, when for example–
a) There is no real majority (Article 492);

b) The resolution is seriously prejudicial to the rights of an
individual co-owner (Article 492);
c) When the majority refuse to correct abuse of administration
or maladministration.
Distinguish acts of administration from acts of alteration.
Acts of administration are those which refer to the enjoyment,

exploitation and alteration of the thing which do not affect its substance
or form, while acts of alteration are those by virtue of which the co-
owner, in opposition to the express or tacit agreement of all the co-
owners, and in violation of their will, changes the thing from the state in
which the others believe it should remain, or withdraws it from the use
to which they believe it is intended.
Consequently, acts of administration are transitory in character,

while acts of alteration are more permanent. The former do not affect the
substance or form of the thing, while the latter relate to the right of the
co-owner, the former require the consent or resolution of the majority of
the co-owners, while the latter require the consent of all.
Distinguish between the right of a co-owner to make repairs

for the preservation of the property owned in common, to perform
acts of administration, and to perform acts of ownership or
alteration.
1) With regard to acts of preservation: - Repairs for preservation may

be made at the will of one of the co-owners, but he must, if
practicable, first notify the other co-owners of the necessity for
such repairs (Article 489);
2) With regard to acts of administration: - Acts of administration can
be performed only with the concurrence of the majority of the co-
owners (Article 492);
3) With regard to acts of alteration: - Acts of alteration can be
performed only with the concurrence of the other owners. (Art.
491)
How is majority of co-owners determined?

To constitute a majority, the co-owners who represent the

controlling interest in the object of the community property must
approve the resolution (Article 492, par. 2);
What is the effect if a co-owner desirers to make an

improvement on the property, but he cannot secure the consent of
the majority?
Should there be no majority, or should the resolution of the

majority be seriously prejudicial to those interested in the property
owned in common, the court, at the instance of an interested party, shall
order such measures, as it may deem proper, including the appointment
of the administrator (Article 492, 2nd paragraph).
Examples of injury that justifies the intervention of the court:
1. When the resolution call for a substantial change or alteration of

the common property or of the use to which it has been dedicated
by agreement or by its nature.
2. When the resolution goes beyond the limits of mere administration,
or invades the proprietary rights of the co-owners, in violation of
Article 491.
3. When the majority authorizes leases, loans, or other contracts
without security, exposing the thing to serious danger to the
prejudice of the other co-owners.
4. When the majority refuse to dismiss an administrator who is guilty
of fraud or negligence in his management, or does not have the
respectability, aptitude, and solvency required of persons holding
such position.
5. When the resolution, if carried out, would cause serious injury to
the thing itself, such as an agreement not to borrow money under
reasonable terms when it is necessary for urgent repairs for
preservation, or for the payment of taxes.
Who has the right of administration of the property owned in

common?
The management of the property owned in common lies, in the first

place, in the co-owners themselves. In this management, the majority of
interests control, and their decisions are binding upon the minority. In
such case, the powers and duties of such administrators shall be
governed by the rules on agency. Should there be no majority, or should
the resolution of the majority be seriously prejudicial to those interested
in the property owned in common, the court, at the instance of the
interested party, may order the appointment of an administrator.

Is the lease of the community property an act of

administration or act of ownership or alteration?
Lease of personal property is a mere act of administration, and

therefore, requires the resolution of the majority of the co-owners.
However, lease of real property may be an act of administration or an act
of alteration depending upon the circumstances of each particular case:
1) If the lease is recorded in the Registry of Property, whatever may be

the duration thereof, it is an act of ownership, and therefore,
requires the unanimous consent of all the co-owners, since under
the law, a special of power of attorney is required (Article 1647);
2) If the lease thereof is more than one year, it is also act of
ownership, and therefore, requires the unanimous consent of the
co-owners, since again, under the law, a special power of attorney
is required (Article 1878);
3) If the lease, however, is not recorded in the Registry of Property
and the duration thereof is only one year or less, it is an act of
administration and therefore, merely requires the resolution of the
majority of the co-owners.
What is the number of co-owners who must consent in the

following acts?
1) Repairs, ejectment action – one (Article 489);

2) Alteration or acts of ownership – all (Article 491);
3) All others, like useful improvements, luxurious embellishments,
administration and better enjoyment – financial majority (not
numerical) (Article 492 and 489).
Can a co-owner go ahead with necessary repairs even against

the opposition of all the rest?
Yes, because the negligence of the others should not prejudice him.
He may advance the funds and recover for the others later. If he has no
money, then he may contract with the repairmen and all the other co-
owners will be liable proportionately to the creditors.
The law says that a co-owner must if practicable first notify

his co-owners for repairs for preservation. Suppose though it was
practicable to do so, no notification was made, would the rest still
be liable?
Yes, since the repairs were essential, in fact, even if the rest would
object, the repairs can go on just the same; though the others may insist
for a lesser price.

What is the rule regarding fractional interest of each co-

owner?
ARTICLE 493. “Each co-owner shall have the full ownership

of his part and of the fruits and benefits pertaining thereto, and he
may therefore alienate, assign or mortgage it, and even substitute
another person in its enjoyment, except when personal rights are
involved. But the effect of the alienation or the mortgage, with
respect to the co-owners, shall be limited to the portion which may
be allotted to him in the division upon the termination of the co-
ownership.”
Article 493 is the rule regarding fractional interest. The partner

provision of Article 493 is Article 486.
Article 493 provides that each co-owner shall have the full
ownership of his part and of the fruits and benefits pertaining thereto,
and he may therefore alienate, assign or mortgage it, and even substitute
another person in its enjoyment, except when personal rights are
involved. But the effect of the alienation or the mortgage, with respect to
the co-owners, shall be limited to the portion which may be allotted to
him in the division upon the termination of the co-ownership.
Article 486 provides that each co-owner may use the thing owned
in common, provided he does so in accordance with the purpose for
which it is intended and in such a way as not to injure the interest of the
co-ownership or prevent the other co-owners from using it according to
their rights.
A co-owner may lease his fractional or ideal share.
A co-owner may not dispose of the entire property owned in

common. If he does so, the transaction is valid in so far as his ideal
share is concern.
When may a co-owner demand partition in so far as his share

of the property owned in common is concerned? What are the
exceptions?
ARTICLE 494. “No co-owner shall be obliged to remain in the

co-ownership. Each co-owner may demand at any time the partition
of the thing owned in common, insofar as his share is concerned.
Nevertheless, an agreement to keep the thing undivided for a

certain period of time, not exceeding ten years, shall be valid. This
term may be extended by a new agreement.

A donor or testator may prohibit partition for a period which

shall not exceed twenty years.
Neither shall there be any partition when it is prohibited by

law.
No prescription shall run in favor of a co-owner or co-heir

against his co-owners or co-heirs so long as he expressly or
impliedly recognizes the co-ownership.”
General Rule: Partition is demandable by any of the co-owners as a

matter of right at any time. If the other co-owners do not consent, then
the co-owner aggrieved can go to court.
Exceptions:
1. When there is an agreement to keep the thing undivided. The

maximum period for such an agreement is 10 years. The
agreement can be extended but such an extension must not go
beyond 10 years. There is no limit as to the number of extensions.
If the co-owners agree to extend for more than 10 years, the

agreement is valid for only 10 years.
2. When prohibited by the donor or testator.
The prohibition by the donor or testator cannot exceed 20 years.
If donor states that the prohibition is for 30 years, the prohibition

is valid for only 20 years.
Even though the testator or donor prohibits partition, the co-

ownership shall terminate when:
1) Any of the causes for which partnership is dissolved takes

place; or
2) The court finds compelling reasons that division should be
ordered upon petition of one of the co-heirs
3. When partition is prohibited by law.
Example: A conjugal partnership or absolute community of

property except in case of legal separation

Exception to the exception: When by compelling reasons it must be

partitioned (i.e., Article 159, Family Code17)
4. When partition renders the thing unserviceable.
Article 498 governs in this case.
Under Article 498, when the thing is essentially indivisible and the
co-owners cannot agree that it be allotted to one of them who shall
indemnify the others, it shall be sold and its proceeds be distributed.
5. When the legal nature of the property does not allow the partition
of the object, like a party wall (Articles 494 and 495).
Does the right to demand partition prescribe?
No, as long as the co-ownership remains.
Edmure, Brynden, and Hoster agreed that there should be no

partition till Edmure gets married. At the end of 10 years, Edmure
has not married yet. Does the co-ownership remain?
No, it should be considered ended already, otherwise the law would

be indirectly violated.
Supposed Edmure got married at the end of 5 years, should

the co-ownership already be considered ended?
Yes, since the resolutory condition has arrived.
Can a co-owner sell a particular portion of the co-ownership

before partition?
No, he has no right to sell by metes and bounds of the property

owned in common. A co-owner can only dispose of his undivided interest
or share.
Can the co-owners demand for partition if it will render the

thing owned in common unserviceable?
17 Art. 159. The family home shall continue despite the death of one or both
spouses or of the unmarried head of the family for a period of ten years or for as long as
there is a minor beneficiary, and the heirs cannot partition the same unless the court
finds compelling reasons therefor. This rule shall apply regardless of whoever owns the
property or constituted the family home.

ARTICLE 495. “Notwithstanding the provisions of the

preceding article, the co-owners cannot demand a physical division
of the thing owned in common, when to do so would render it
unserviceable for the use for which it is intended. But the co-
ownership may be terminated in accordance with article 498.”
This Article merely prevents material or physical division of the

thing owned in common, but does not preclude the termination of the
juridical condition of the co-owners by such means as the adjudication to
one co-owner or the sale of the property and the division of its proceeds,
under Article 498.
May prescription run against a co-owner?
As a rule, no, as long as the co-ownership is expressly or impliedly

recognized.
The exception is when there is repudiation, provided that the

following requisites are present:
1) He must make known to the other that he is repudiating the co-

ownership and claiming complete ownership of the entire property;
2) Evidence of repudiation and knowledge of others is clear and
convincing;
3) There is open, continuous, adverse possession for a period of time
required by law;
4) The period of prescription shall start to run only from such
repudiation of co-ownership.
How may co-ownership be terminated?
ARTICLE 496. “Partition may be made by agreement between

the parties or by judicial proceedings. Partition shall be governed
by the Rules of Court insofar as they are consistent with this
Code.”
Partition converts into certain and definite parts the respective

share of the undivided shares of the co-owners.
Ways of termination of co-ownership:
1) Judicial partition;
2) Extra-judicial partition;
3) When by prescription, one co-owner has acquired the whole
property by adverse possession;

4) When a stranger acquires by prescription the thing owned in

common;
5) Merger in one co-owner;
6) Loss or destruction of the thing;
7) By expropriation.
Anything that terminates a co-ownership is similar to a partition.
In Tuason vs. Tuason, the co-owners of a huge parcel of land

agreed to improve the property by filling it and constructing roads
thereon and then sub-dividing it into small lots for sale. They entered
into a contract obliging the co-owners to preserve the co-ownership until
all the lots shall have been sold. Subsequently, one of the co-owners
asked the court for partition alleging that Article 494 was violated. The
Supreme Court ruled that the contract has for its purpose and object the
dissolution of the co-ownership and of the community by selling the
parcel held in common and dividing the proceeds of the sale among the
co-owners. The obligation imposed in the contract to preserve the co-
ownership until all the lots shall have been sold, is a mere incident to the
main object of dissolving the coownership. By virtue of the document,
the parties thereto practically and substantially entered into a contract of
partnership as the best and most expedient means of eventually
dissolving the co-ownership, and the life of said partnership to end when
the object of its creation shall have been attained.
What are the rights of creditors or assignees or with respect to

the partition of property held in common?
ARTICLE 497. “The creditors or assignees of the co-owners

may take part in the division of the thing owned in common and
object to its being effected without their concurrence. But they
cannot impugn any partition already executed, unless there has
been fraud, or in case it was made notwithstanding a formal
opposition presented to prevent it, without prejudice to the right of
the debtor or assignor to maintain its validity.”
Rights of creditors and assignees:
1) They may take part in the division of the thing owned in common;
2) Object to its being effected without their concurrence;
3) But they cannot impugn any partition already executed, unless
there has been (1) fraud, or (2) in case it was made
notwithstanding a formal opposition presented to prevent it.
(Without prejudice to the right of the debtor or assignor to
maintain its validity).

What are the rules if the object is essentially indivisible?
ARTICLE 498. “Whenever the thing is essentially indivisible

and the co-owners cannot agree that it be allotted to one of them
who shall indemnify the others, it shall be sold and its proceeds
distributed.”
What is allowed here is only a constructive and not a physical

partition (i.e. in a partition of a house).
Rules:
1) Give the whole to one co-owner who will indemnify the rest;
2) If this cannot be agreed, there must be a public sale and its proceeds
distributed among them.
What is the limitation of partition for the protection of third

person’s rights?
ARTICLE 499. “The partition of a thing owned in common

shall not prejudice third persons, who shall retain the rights of
mortgage, servitude, or any other real rights belonging to them
before the division was made. Personal rights pertaining to third
persons against the co-ownership shall also remain in force,
notwithstanding the partition.”
What are the obligations of the co-owners after partition?
ARTICLE 500. “Upon partition, there shall be a mutual

accounting for benefits received and reimbursements for expenses
made. Likewise, each co-owner shall pay for damages caused by
reason of his negligence or fraud.”
ARTICLE 501. “Every co-owner shall, after partition, be liable

for defects of title and quality of the portion assigned to each of
the other co-owners.”
Obligations of the co-owners after partition:
1) Mutual accounting for benefits received (Article 500);

2) Mutual reimbursement for expenses (Article 500);
3) Indemnity for damages in case of negligence or fraud (Article 500);
4) Reciprocal warranty for (1) defects of title or eviction and (2) quality
for hidden defects (Article 501);

5) Each former co-owner is deemed to have had exclusive possession

of that part allotted to him for the entire period during which the
co-possession lasted (Article 543);
6) Partition confers upon each, the exclusive title over his respective
share.
Rhaegar and Elia were co-owners. They partitioned their land.

Later, Aerys was able to prove that he really owned the lot belonging
to Elia. Should Elia alone bear the loss?
No, both Rhaegar and Elia must bear the loss in that Rhaegar
must give half of his portion to Elia because there is a reciprocal or
mutual warranty against eviction.
TITLE IV
Some Special Properties
CHAPTER 1
Waters
SECTION 1
Ownership of Waters
ARTICLE 502. “The following are of public dominion:

(1) Rivers and their natural beds;
(2) Continuous or intermittent waters of springs and brooks

running in their natural beds and the beds themselves;
(3) Waters rising continuously or intermittently on lands of public

dominion;
(4) Lakes and lagoons formed by Nature on public lands, and their
beds;
(5) Rain waters running through ravines or sand beds, which are
also of public dominion;
(6) Subterranean waters on public lands;
(7) Waters found within the zone of operation of public works, even
if constructed by a contractor;

(8) Waters rising continuously or intermittently on lands belonging

to private persons, to the State, to a province, or to a city or a
municipality from the moment they leave such lands;
(9) The waste waters of fountains, sewers and public

establishments.”
ARTICLE 503. The following are of private ownership:

(1) Continuous or intermittent waters rising on lands of private
ownership, while running through the same;
(2) Lakes and lagoons, and their beds, formed by Nature on such
lands;
(3) Subterranean waters found on the same;
(4) Rain waters falling on said lands, as long as they remain within the
boundaries;
(5) The beds of flowing waters, continuous or intermittent, formed by
rain water, and those of brooks, crossing lands which are not of public
dominion.
In every drain or aqueduct, the water, bed, banks and floodgates shall be
considered as an integral part of the land of building for which the
waters are intended. The owners of lands, through which or along the
boundaries of which the aqueduct passes, cannot claim ownership over
it, or any right to the use of its bed or banks, unless the claim is based
on titles of ownership specifying the right or ownership claimed. (408)
SECTION 2
The Use of Public Waters
ARTICLE 504. The use of public waters is acquired: cdtai
(1) By administrative concession;
(2) By prescription for ten years.
The extent of the rights and obligations of the use shall be that
established, in the first case, by the terms of the concession, and, in the
second case, by the manner and form in which the waters have been
used. (409a)
ARTICLE 505. Every concession for the use of waters is understood to
be without prejudice to third persons. (410)
ARTICLE 506. The right to make use of public waters is extinguished
by the lapse of the concession and by non-user for five years. (411a)
SECTION 3
The Use of Waters of Private Ownership
ARTICLE 507. The owner of a piece of land on which a spring or
brook rises, be it continuous or intermittent, may use its waters while
they run through the same, but after the waters leave the land they shall
become public, and their use shall be governed by the Special Law of
Waters of August 3, 1866, and by the Irrigation Law. (412a)
ARTICLE 508. The private ownership of the beds of rain waters does
not give a right to make works or constructions which may change their

course to the damage of third persons, or whose destruction, by the force

of floods, may cause such damage. (413)
ARTICLE 509. No one may enter private property to search waters or
make use of them without permission from the owners, except as
provided by the Mining Law. (414a)
ARTICLE 510. The ownership which the proprietor of a piece of land
has over the waters rising thereon does not prejudice the rights which
the owners of lower estates may have legally acquired to the use thereof.
(415) cdtai
ARTICLE 511. Every owner of a piece of land has the right to
construct within his property, reservoirs for rain waters, provided he
causes no damage to the public or to third persons. (416)
SECTION 4
Subterranean Waters
ARTICLE 512. Only the owner of a piece of land, or another person
with his permission, may make explorations thereon for subterranean
waters, except as provided by the Mining Law.
Explorations for subterranean waters on lands of public dominion may
be made only with the permission of the administrative authorities.
(417a)
ARTICLE 513. Waters artificially brought forth in accordance with the
Special Law of Waters of August 3, 1866, belong to the person who
brought them up. (418)
ARTICLE 514. When the owner of waters artificially brought to the
surface abandons them to their natural course, they shall become of
public dominion. (419)
SECTION 5
General Provisions
ARTICLE 515. The owner of a piece of land on which there are
defensive works to check waters, or on which, due to a change of their
course, it may be necessary to reconstruct such works, shall be obliged,
at his election, either to make the necessary repairs or construction
himself, or to permit them to be done, without damage to him, by the
owners of the lands which suffer or are clearly exposed to suffer injury.
(420)
ARTICLE 516. The provisions of the preceding article are applicable
to the case in which it may be necessary to clear a piece of land of
matter, whose accumulation or fall may obstruct the course of the
waters, to the damage or peril of third persons. (421)
ARTICLE 517. All the owners who participate in the benefits arising
from the works referred to in the two preceding articles, shall be obliged
to contribute to the expenses of construction in proportion to their
respective interests. Those who by their fault may have caused the
damage shall be liable for the expenses. (422) cdt

ARTICLE 518. All matters not expressly determined by the provisions

of this Chapter shall be governed by the Special Law of Waters of August
3, 1866, and by the Irrigation Law. (425a)
CHAPTER 2
Minerals
ARTICLE 519. Mining claims and rights and other matters
concerning minerals and mineral lands are governed by special laws.
(427a)
CHAPTER 3
Trade-marks and Trade-names
ARTICLE 520. A trade-mark or trade-name duly registered in the
proper government bureau or office is owned by and pertains to the
person, corporation, or firm registering the same, subject to the
provisions of special laws. (n) cdtai
ARTICLE 521. The goodwill of a business is property, and may be
transferred together with the right to use the name under which the
business is conducted. (n)
ARTICLE 522. Trade-marks and trade-names are governed by special
laws. (n)
TITLE V. – POSSESSION
CHAPTER 1
POSSESSION AND THE KINDS THEREOF
Define possession.
Possession is the holding of a thing or the enjoyment of a right

(Article 523), either by material occupation or by the fact of subjecting
the thing or right to the action of our will.
What are the viewpoints of possession?
a. Right to possession (jus possidendi) – This is a right or

incident of ownership;
b. Right of possession (jus possessionis) – This is an
independent right of itself, independent of ownership.
Distinguish between jus possessionis and jus possidendi.
Jus possessionis is the right of possession of a thing or right

independent of the right of ownership, while jus possidendi is the right to
the possession of a thing or right as a consequence of ownership.

What are the degrees of possession?
1) Mere holding or having, without any right whatsoever.

2) Possession with a juridical title, but not that of an owner.
3) Possession with a just title, but not from the true owner.
4) Possession with a title of dominion, that is, with a just title from
the owner.
What are the requisites or elements of possession?
1) There must be a holding or control of a thing or a right (corpus);

2) There must be a deliberate intention to possess (animus
possidendi);
3) The possession must be by virtue of one’s own right.
What are the classes of possession?
1) In one’s own name or that of another (Article 524);

2) In the concept of an owner or in the concept of a holder (Article
525);
3) In good faith (bona fide) or in bad faith (mala fide).
When does possession in another’s name arise?
1) Voluntary – as when an agent possesses for the principal.

2) Necessary – as when a mother possesses for a child still in the
maternal womb.
3) Unauthorized.
What is meant by possessor in good faith and possessor in bad

faith?
He is deemed a possessor in good faith who is not aware that there

exists in his title or mode of acquisition any flaw which invalidates it.
He is deemed a possessor in bad faith who possesses in any case

contrary to the foregoing.
Mistakes upon a doubtful or difficult question of law may be the

basis of good faith (Article 526).
What requisites must concur in order that one may be

classified as a possessor in good faith?
1) The possessor should have acquired the thing through some title
or by some mode of acquisition recognized by law;

2) There must be a flaw or defect in such title or mode of acquisition;

3) The possessor should not be aware of such flaw or defect.
What are the requisites for possession in bad faith?
1) The possessor should have acquired the thing through some title
or by some mode of acquisition required by law;
2) There must be a flaw or defect in such title or mode of acquisition;
3) The possessor should be aware of such flaw.
What is the effect on mistake on a doubtful or difficult

question of law?
Mistake upon a doubtful or difficult question of law, provided that

such ignorance is not gross and therefore inexcusable, may be the basis
of good faith.
When does possession in good faith lose this character?
1) Possession in good faith loses this character from the moment facts
exist which show that the possessor is not unaware that he possesses
the thing improperly or wrongfully (Article 528);
2) If there are no facts, which the interruption of good faith may be
determined, and an action is filed to recover possession, good faith
ceases from the moment the possessor receives the judicial summons
to appear at the trial (Article 528);
3) Even before judicial summons when a letter is received informing him
of the ownership (Ortiz vs. Fuentebella, 27 Phil, 537; Wong vs. Carpio,
G.R. No. 50264, October 21, 1991).
What are the presumptions regarding possession under the

Civil Code?
1) Presumption of good faith – good faith is always presumed, and

upon him who alleges bad faith on the part of a possessor rests the
burden of proof (Article 527);
2) Continuity of character of possession – It is presumed that
possession continues to be enjoyed in the same character in which
it was acquired, until the contrary is proved (Article 529);
3) Non-interruption of possession – The possession of hereditary
property is deemed transmitted to the heir without interruption,
and from the moment of the death of the decedent, in case the
inheritance is accepted. On who validly renounces an inheritance
is deemed never to have possessed the same (Article 530);

4) Presumption of just title – A possessor in the concept of owner has

in his favor the legal presumption that he possesses with just title,
and he cannot be obliged to show or prove it (Article 541);
5) Non-interruption of possession of property unjustly lost but legally
recovered. – One who recovers possession unjustly lost, shall be
deemed for all purposes which may redound to his benefit, to have
enjoyed it without interruption (Article 561);
6) Possession during intervening period – It is presumed, that the
present possessor who was also the possessor at a previous time,
has continued to be in possession during the intervening time,
unless there is proof to the contrary (Article 1138 [2]);
7) Possession of movables with real property – The possession of real
property presumes that of the movables therein, so long as it is not
shown or proved that they should be excluded (Article 542);
8) Exclusive possession of common property – Each one of the
participants of a thing possessed in common shall be deemed to
have exclusively possessed the part which may be allotted to him
upon the division thereof, for the entire period during which the
co-possession lasted (Article 543).
What may be possessed?
Only those things and rights, which are susceptible of being

appropriated, may be the object of possession (Article 530).
What properties may not be appropriated?
1) Property of public dominion;

2) Res communes;
3) Easements;
4) Things specifically prohibited by law.
What is res nullius? Can they be possessed?
They are abandoned or ownerless properties. They may be possessed,

but cannot be acquired by prescription because prescription
presupposes prior ownership in another. However, they may be acquired
by occupation.
CHAPTER 2. - ACQUISITION OF POSSESSION
How is possession acquired?

a. The material occupation of a thing or the exercise of a right

(Article 531) [quasi-possession].
This also includes:
a) constitutom possessorium – when a person

who possessed property as an owner, now
possesses it in some other capacity, as
that of lessee or depositary; and
b) tradition brevi manu – this exists when a
person who possessed property not as an
owner (like a lessee), now possess it as an
owner.
b. By the fact that it is subject to the action of our will (Article

531).
This includes:
a) tradition longa manu – by mere agreement;

and
b) traditio simbolica – by the delivery of keys.
c. By constructive possession or proper acts and legal

formalities established for acquiring such right (Article 531),
such as succession, donation, execution of public
instruments; or thru the possession by a sheriff by virtue of
a court order.
What are the essential requirements for possession?
1) The corpus, or the thing physically detained;

2) The animus or the intent to possess, whether evidenced expressly
or impliedly.
How is possession acquired from the viewpoint of who

possess?
1) Personal;
2) Thru an authorized person, or agent or legal representative;
3) Thru an unauthorized person, but only if subsequently ratified
(Article 532).
What are the essential requisites of the following?

1) For personal acquisition:
1. Intent to possess
2. Capacity to possess
3. Object must be capable of being possessed
2) Thru an authorized person:
1. Intent to possess for principal (not for agent)

2. Authority or capacity to possess (for another)
3. Principal has intent and capacity to possess.
3) Thru an unauthorized person (as in negotiorum gestio):
1. Intent to possess for another (the “principal”)

2. Capacity of “principal” to possess
3. Ratification by “principal” (It has retroactive effect)
What is negotiorium gestio?
Article 2144. Whoever voluntarily takes charge of the agency or

management of the business or property of another without any power
from the latter, is obliged to continue the same until the termination of
the affair and its incidents, or to require the person concerned to
substitute him, if the owner is in a position to do so.
What are the instances where the juridical relation does not
arise in negotiorum gestio?
1. When the property or business is not neglected or abandoned;

2. If in fact the manager has been tacitly authorized by the owner;
X is the heir of Y who died on December 10, 1992. He

accepted his inheritance from his father on June 21, 1993. From
what time should his possession be reckoned with?
It should be computed from the moment of the death of Y, because

the possession of hereditary property is deemed transmitted to the heir
without interruption and from the moment of death of the decedent, in
case the inheritance is accepted (Article 533).
Suppose X repudiates the inheritance, is he presumed to have

been in possession of the property?
No, because one who validly renounces an inheritance is deemed

never to have possessed the same (Article 533, last sentence).

X has been in possession of a property in bad faith. After his

death, y, his daughter continued possessing the property. Will the
bad faith of X be suffered by Y?
No, as a rule, because one who succeeds by hereditary title does

not suffer the consequences of the wrongful possession of the decedent,
if shown that he is in good faith, but the effects of possession in good
faith shall not benefit him except from the date of death of the decedent
(Article 534). In Escritor vs. IAC, November 12, 1987, it was held that the
reason for Article 534 is that bad faith is not transmissible to the heirs
unless they know the flaw in one’s title.
How may minors and incapacitated persons acquire the

possession of things?
Minors and incapacitated persons may acquire the possession of

things; but they need the assistance of their legal representatives in
order to exercise the rights from which the possession arise in their favor
(Article 535).
A has been in possession in good faith of a parcel of land for a

period of 4 years. Upon death, B, his son, continued possessing the
land. How many years more should B possess the land in order that
he may be the owner?
Six (6) years. Under the law, possession of hereditary property is

deemed transmitted to the heir without interruption and upon the
moment of death of the decedent if inheritance is accepted. In the case, it
was accepted since he continued possessing the land. This is so because
B’s possession is tacked to the possession of his father, A. In the
computation of the time necessary for prescription, the present possessor
may complete the period for prescription by tacking his possession to
that of his grantor or predecessor-in-interest.
What is the principle of tacking of possession?
It is the principle where in computing the time necessary for

prescription, the present possessor may complete the period necessary
for prescription by adding his possession to that of his grantor or
predecessor in interest (Article 1138, par. 1)
May possession acquired through force, violence or tolerance

ripen into ownership?

No. Article 536 provides that in no case may possession be

acquired through force or intimidation as long as there is a possessor
who objects thereto. He who believes that he has an action or a right to
deprive another of the holding of a thing, must invoke the aid of the
competent court, if the holder should refuse to deliver the thing.
Likewise, Article 537 provides that acts merely tolerated, and those
executed clandestinely and without the knowledge of the possessor of a
thing, or by violence, do not affect possession.
What are the remedies which are available to a possessor in

order to protect his possession?
1. With regard to immovable property:
1) Action for forcible entry and unlawful detainer –

action to recover material possession of the property,
and which must be instituted with one year from the
time the cause of action accrues in the MTC.
2) Accion publiciana – the plenary action to recover the
possession of the property, and which must be
instituted with 10 years after the possession has
been lost in the proper RTC
3) Accion reinvidicatoria – An action to recover
possession of the property based on ownership, and
must be instituted with 10 or 30 years, as the case
may be, after the owner has been deprived of his
property in the proper RTC.
2. With regard to movable property:
Action for replevin which is an action for the manual delivery of

personal property.
What is the general rule regarding possession as a fact (Article

538)?
Possession as a fact cannot be recognized at the same time in two

different personalities.
Exception:
a) co-possessors;
b) Possession in different concepts or different degrees.
What are the rules in case of conflict of possession?

Possession as a fact cannot be recognized at the same time in two

different personalities except in the case of co-possession. Should a
question arise regarding the fact of possession:
1. Present possessor is preferred;

2. If both are in possession, the one longer in possession shall be
preferred;
3. If possession started at the same time, the one with a title is
preferred;
4. If both have a title, the court will determine (Article 538).
CHAPTER 3. – EFFECTS OF POSSESSION
What are the three general rights of a possessor?
a. The right to be respected in his possession;

b. The protection in said right or restoration to said possession thru
legal means;
c. The writ of preliminary mandatory injunction.
When may possession serve as a title for acquiring dominion

over the thing?
Only possession acquired and enjoyed in the concept of owner can

serve as a title for acquiring dominion (Article 540).
Outline of the effects of possession in good faith and bad faith:
A. FRUITS RECEIVED:
1. Possessor in good faith is entitled to fruits received while his

possession is still in good faith (Article 544); 18
2. Possessor in bad faith shall reimburse the fruits received or
which the legitimate possessor could have received, subject
to Article 443. (Article 549).
18
Article 544. A possessor in good faith is entitled to the fruits received before the
possession is legally interrupted.
Natural and industrial fruits are considered received from the time they are gathered or
severed.
Civil fruits are deemed to accrue daily and belong to the possessor in good faith in that
proportion.

B. PENDING FRUITS:
1. Possessor in good faith and legitimate possessor shall be

liable for expenses of cultivation and shall share in net
harvest in proportion to the time of their possession (Article
545, par. 1); 19
2. Possessor in bad faith shall have not any right.
C. CHARGES:
Possessor, whether in good faith or bad faith, and legitimate

possessor shall share charges in proportion to the time of their
possession (Article 545, par. 1).
D. EXPENSES:
1. Necessary expenses -
a. Rights of a possessor in good faith (Article 546, par.

1): 20
(a) Right of reimbursement;

(b) Right of retention.
b. Right of possessor in bad faith: Right of reimbursed

only.
2. Useful expenses -
a. Rights of possessor in good faith:
19
Article 545. If at the time the good faith ceases, there should be any natural or
industrial fruits, the possessor shall have a right to a part of the expenses of cultivation and to a
part of the net harvest, both in proportion to the time of the possession.
The charges shall be divided on the same basis by the two possessors.
The owner of the thing may, should he so desire, give the possessor in good faith the
right to finish the cultivation and gathering of the growing fruits, as an indemnity for his part of
the expenses of cultivation and the net proceeds; the possessor in good faith who for any reason
whatsoever should effuse to accept this concession, shall lose the right to be indemnified in any
other manner.
20
Necessary expenses shall be refunded to every possessor; but only the possessor in
good faith may retain the thing until he has been reimbursed therefor.
Useful expenses shall be refunded only to the possessor in good faith with the same right
of retention, the person who has defeated him in the possession having the option of refunding
the amount of the expenses or of paying the increase in value which the thing may have acquired
by reason thereof.

(1) Right of reimbursement;

(2) Right of retention (Article 546, par. 2);
(3) Limited right of removal (Article 547). 21
b. Right of possessor in bad faith: None.

3. Ornamental expenses -
a. Right of possessor in good faith: Limited right of

removal (Article 548); 22
b. Right of possessor in bad faith: Limited right of
removal (Article 549); 23
E. DETERIORATION OR LOSS:
1. Possessor in good faith – No liability, unless due to his fault

or negligence after he had become a possessor in bad faith
(Article 552);
2. Possessor in bad faith – Always liable, whether due to his
fault or negligence or due to fortuitous event (Article 552);
If the possessor is ousted from his possession by the true

owner of the property, what are the rights of the two parties with
respect to the fruits received or harvested by the possessor?
The rights of the two parties shall depend upon the character of
the possession of the possessor.
1. If the possessor was in good faith, he is entitled to all of the fruits

received before his possession was illegally interrupted. Natural
and industrial fruits are considered received from the time they are
gathered or severed, while civil fruits are deemed to accrue daily
and belong to the possessor in good faith in that proportion (Article
Article 547. If the useful improvements can be removed without damage to the
21
principal thing, the possessor in good faith may remove them, unless the person who recovers
the possession exercises the option under paragraph 2 of the preceding article.
22
Article 548. Expenses for purer luxury or mere pleasure shall not be refunded to the
possessor in good faith; but he may remove the ornaments with which he has embellished the
principal thing if it suffers no injury thereby, and if his successor in the possession does not
prefer to refund the amount expended.
23
Article 549. The possessor in bad faith shall reimburse the fruits received and those
which the legitimate possessor could have receive, and shall have a right only to the expenses
mentioned in paragraph 1 of Article 546 and in Article 443. The expenses incurred in
improvements for pure luxury or mere pleasure shall not be refunded to the possessor in bad
faith; but he may remove the objects for which such expenses have been incurred, provided that
the thing suffers no injury thereby, and that the lawful possessor does not prefer to retain them
by paying the value they may have at the time he enters into possession

544). The true owner of the property on the other hand, shall be
entitled to the fruits received by the possessor after the latter’s
possession was illegally interrupted by the service of judicial
summons.
2. If the possessor was in bad faith, he shall reimburse not only the
fruits which he had received, but also those which the true owner
could have received with the exercise of due diligence (Article 549,
1st sentence), after deducting expenses which he might have
incurred in their production, gathering and harvesting (Articles
549, 443).
In the problem above, what are the rights of the two parties
with respect to pending natural and industrial fruits?
The rights of the two parties shall depend upon the character of
the possession of the possessor.
1. If the possessor was in good faith, then both parties shall share in
the expenses of cultivation as well as in the net harvest in
proportion to the time of their respective possession. The owner,
should he so desire, may give the possessor in good faith the right
to finish the cultivation and gathering of the growing fruits as an
indemnity for his part of the expenses of cultivation and the net
harvest. If the possessor in good faith for any reason whatsoever
should refuse to accept this concession, he shall lose his right to
be indemnified in any other manner (Article 545).
2. If the possessor was in bad faith, the true owner shall be entitled
to all the pending fruits in accordance with the principle of
accession (Article 449), as well as damages (Article 451).
Under the problems above, what are the rights of the two
parties with respect to taxes on the property and other charges?
Taxes and other charges shall be divided between the possessor

and the owner in proportion to the time of their respective possession,
irrespective of the good faith or bad faith of the former (Article 455, par.
2)
Who shall bear the cost of litigation over the property?
The costs of litigation over the property shall be borne by every

possessor (Article 550).
To whom shall improvements caused by nature or time inure?

Improvements caused by nature or time shall always inure to the

benefit of the person who has succeeded in recovering possession (Article
551).
Who shall be liable for loss or deterioration of the thing

possessed?
A possessor in good faith shall not be liable for the deterioration or

loss of the thing possessed, except in cases in which it is proved that he
has acted with fraudulent intent or negligence, after the judicial
summons.
A possessor in bad faith shall be liable for deterioration or loss in

every case, even if caused by a fortuitous event (Article 552).
What is the rule as to improvements which have ceased to

exist?
One who recovers possession shall not be obliged to pay for
improvements which have ceased to exist at the time he takes possession
of the thing (Article 553).
What is meant by (1) necessary expenses, (2) useful expenses,

and (3) ornamental expenses or expenses for pure luxury?
1. Necessary expenses are those which are for the

preservation of the thing.
2. Useful expenses are those which are incurred for the
greater productivity or utility of the thing.
3. Expenses for pure luxury are those which are incurred for
the convenience and enjoyment of the possessor, but
which do not affect the existence, productivity or utility of
the thing itself.
Under the problems above, what are the rights of the two
parties with respect to (1) necessary expenses? (2) useful expenses?
(3) expenses for luxury?
The rights of the two parties with respect to such expenses shall
depend upon the character of the possession of the possessor.
a) Necessary expenses –
(1) If the possessor was in good faith, he shall have the right to
demand from the owner reimbursement of all necessary
expenses. In addition, he shall also have the right to retain the

thing until he has been reimbursed therfore (Article 546, par.

1).
(2) If the possessor was in bad faith, he shall have only the right to
demand from the owner reimbursement of all necessary
expenses without any right of retention (Article 546, par.1)
b) Useful expenses –
(1) If the possessor was in good faith, the owner or legitimate

possessor shall have the option of reimbursing to such possessor
the amount of all useful expenses or of paying the increase in
value which the thing may have acquired by reason thereof. If the
owner chooses the first option, the possessor may retain the thing
until he has been reimbursed therefore (Article 546, par. 2). If the
owner does not avail himself of either option, the initiative passes
to the possessor, in which case such possessor shall have the
option of demanding from the owner reimbursement of all useful
expenses with the accessory right of retention (Article 546, par.2)
or of removing the useful improvements, provided that such
removal can be made without damage to the principal thing (Article
547).
(2) If the possessor was in bad faith, he shall not have any right
whatsoever. Consequently, the owner shall be entitled to all of the
useful improvements without obligation on his part.
c) Expenses for pure luxury –
As far as ornamental expenses or expenses for pure luxury

are concerned, the possessor is entitled to only right – a limited
right to remove the ornaments with which he has embellished the
principal thing.
(1) If such possessor was in good faith, he may remove the

ornaments, provided that the principal thing suffers no injury
thereby, and that the owner or legitimate possessor does not
prefer to retain such ornaments by reimbursing to the
possessor the amount expended (Article 548).
(2) If the possessor was in bad faith, he may remove the

ornaments, provided that the principal thing suffers no injury
thereby, and that the owner does not prefer to retain such
ornaments by reimbursing to the possessor the value they may
have at the time he enters into possession (Article 549)

When is possession of movables and immovables deemed lost

or not lost?
The possession of movable is not deemed lost so long as they

remain under the control of the possessor, even though for the time
being he may not know their whereabouts (Article 556).
The possession of immovables and of real rights is not deemed lost,

or transferred for purposes of prescription to the prejudice of third
persons, except in accordance with the provisions of the Mortgage Law
and the Land Registration Laws (Article 557).
Can the true owner recover a movable thing from a possessor

who is in possession of such thing in a concept of an owner?
It depends:
1. If the possessor acquired the thing in bad faith, the true owner
can recover without any obligation whatsoever.
2. If he acquired it in good faith, the true owner cannot recover it

because possession of a movable acquired in good faith is
equivalent to a title (Article 559, par. 1). This is nevertheless
subject to the following exceptions:
a. If the true owner has lost the movable

b. If such owner has been unlawfully deprived thereof.
In such cases, the true owner can recover the movable

from anyone without any obligations whatsoever, except:
The possessor has acquired the movable in good faith at a

public sale, in which case the owner cannot recover it
without reimbursing the price paid therefor (Article 559, par.
1).
What are the different instances where the owner of a movable

who has lost it or who has been unduly deprived thereof can no
longer recover it from the possessor?
1. If recovery is no longer possible because of prescription (Article

1132);
2. If the possessor had acquired the thing from a person whose
authority to sell the owner is by his conduct precluded from
denying (Article 1505, par. 1);

3. If the possessor had acquired the thing from a merchant’s store

or in fairs or markets, in accordance with the Code of
Commerce and special laws. (Article 1505, No. 3);
4. If the thing is a negotiable instrument or a negotiable document
of title and the possessor is a purchaser in good faith and for
value. (Section 57, Act No. 2031, Article 1518);
5. If the possessor is now the owner of the thing in accordance

with the principle of finder keepers recognized in Article 719.
What are the rules as to recovery or non-recovery?
a. Owner may recover without reimbursement:
1. From possessor in bad faith;

2. From possessor in good faith if owner had lost the property or
has been unlawfully deprived of it.
b. Owner may recover but should reimburse:
1. If possessor acquired the object in good faith at a public sale or

auction.
c. Owner cannot recover, even if he offers to reimburse

(whether or not the owner had lost or been unlawfully
deprived):
1. If possessor had acquired it in good faith by purchase

from a merchant’s store, or in fairs, or markets;
2. If owner is by his conduct precluded from denying the
seller’s authority to sell (estoppel);
3. If possessor had obtained the goods because he was an
innocent purchaser for value and holder of a negotiable
document of title to the goods.
X owns a diamond ring which was stolen by her maid who sold
it to Y, a friend of X. X saw the ring in Y’s possession. Can he
recover it?
Yes, under the law, one who has lost any movable or has been
unlawfully deprived thereof, may recover it from the person in possession
of the same (Article 559).
Within what period should X file the action to recover it?

Eight (8) years. Under Article 1140, actions to recover movables

shall prescribe eight years from the time the possession thereof was lost.
Suppose Y acquired it from a public sale or a merchant’s store,

can X recover it?
Yes, provided that he complies with the requisite that he should

reimburse the price paid by the possessor. Under the law, if the
possessor of a movable lost or of which the owner has been unlawfully
deprived, has acquired it in good faith at a public sale, the owner cannot
obtain its return without reimbursing the price paid therefor (Article
559).
The same is true if the object was acquired from a merchant’s store
or in fairs or markets (Article 1505 [3]).
What is meant by the phrase “unlawfully deprived” under

Article 559 of the Civil Code?
The term or phrase “unlawfully deprived” extends to all cases

where there has been no valid transmission of ownership, including a
depositary or a lessee who has sold the same (Ledesma vs. Ca, G.R. No.
86051, September 1, 1992).
If a person issues a check in payment of an obligation and the

check bounces, is the other party considered unlawfully deprived
such that he can recover the object he delivered?
He is not considered unlawfully deprived within the meaning of the

law. In Ledesma vs. CA, G.R. No. 86051, September 1, 1992, it was held
that there was a perfected unconditional contract of sale between the
seller and the buyer. The former voluntarily caused the transfer. Title
thereto was acquired. The subsequent dishonor of the check merely
amounted to a failure of consideration which does not render the
contract of sale void, but merely allows the prejudiced party to sue for
specific performance or rescission of the contract and to prosecute the
impostor for estafa under Article 315 of the Revised Penal Code.
What are the rules as to possession of animals (Article 560)?
1. Possession of wild animals is lost when they are under

another’s control or under no one’s control;
2. Possession of domesticated or tamed animals:
a. The possessor does no lose possession of them, as long as

habitually they return to the possessor’s premises.

b. Possession of them is lost if the aforementioned habit has

ceased. But insofar as ownership is concerned, Article
716 provides that the owner thereof may claim them
within 20 days to be counted from their occupation by
another person.
What are the presumptions in favor of the possessor under the

chapter?
1. Article 541 – Possessor has just title

2. Article 542 – Possession of movables found in an immovable
3. Article 543 – Exclusive possession by a previous co-owner
4. Article 554 – Possession during the intervening period
5. Article 561 – Lawful recovery of possession that has been
unjustly lost
When may possession be lost?
1. By the abandonment of the thing;

2. By an assignment made to another either by onerous or gratuitous
title;
3. By the destruction or total loss of the thing, or because it goes out
of commerce;
4. By the possession of another, subject to the provisions of Article
537, if the new possession has lasted longer than one year. But the
real right of possession is not lost till after the lapse of ten years.
What is the prescription period of movables?
1. Action to recover fact of possession – 1 year (Article 555)

2. Action to recover movables – 8 years (Article 1140)
3. Ownership of movables – 4 years if in good faith, 8 years if in bad
faith (Article 1132)
4. Movable possessed through crime – none (can never prescribe
(Article 1133)
TITLE VI. – USUFRUCT
CHAPTER 1
USUFRUCT IN GENERAL
What is usufruct?

Usufruct gives a right to enjoy the property of another with the

obligation of preserving its form and substance, unless the title
constituting it or the law otherwise provides (Article 562).
The combination of jus utendi and fruendi is called usufruct.
What are the characteristics or elements of usufruct?
1) Essential characteristics:
a. It is a real right, whether registered in the Registry of

Property or not;
b. It is of a temporary nature or duration;
c. Its purpose is to enjoy the benefits and derive all advantages
from the object as a consequence of normal use or
exploitation.
2) Natural characteristic:
The obligation to preserve its form and substance.
What may be the objects of usufruct?
a. It may be real or personal property;

b. It may be sterile or productive;
c. It may be created over a right.
What are the rights of action available to a usufructuary?
a) The action to protect the usufruct itself;

b) The action to protect the exercise of the usufruct.
How may a usufruct be constituted?
Usufruct is constituted:
a) By law (legal);
b) By the will of private persons expressed in acts inter vivos or in
a last will and testament (voluntary); and
c) By prescription (mixed).
Why is registration of usufruct over real property necessary?
A usufruct over real property, being a real right, must be duly

registered in order to bind innocent third parties (Article 709).
How is usufruct classified (Article 564)?

a) According to quantity or extent of fruits or object:
(1) As to fruits – total or partial;

(2) As to objects – universal, if over the entire patrimony (Article
598); or singular, if only individual things are included.
b) As to the number of persons enjoying the right:
(1) Simple – if only one usufructuary enjoys;

(2) Multiple – if several usufructuaries enjoy:
a. Simultaneous;
b. Successive.
c) As to the quality or kind of objects involved:
(1) Usufruct over rights;

(2) Usufruct over things:
a. Normal usufruct – this involves non-consumable things

where the form and substance are preserved;
b. Abnormal usufruct – this involves consumable property
(also called quasi-usufruct).
d) According to terms or conditions:
(1) Pure usufruct – no term or condition;

(2) With a term or period:
a. Ex die – from a certain day;

b. In diem – up to a certain day; and
c. Ex die in diem – from a certain day up to a certain day
(3) With a condition
What are the conditions required if the usufruct is created by

donation or by testamentary succession?
(1) If the usufruct is created by donation, all the donees must be alive,
or at least already conceived, at the time of the perfection of the
donation (Article 756);
(2) In the case of testamentary succession, there must only be two
successive usufructuaries; and both must be alive or at least
conceived at the time of the testator’s death (Articles 863 and 869).

What are the rules governing a usufruct?
1. First, the agreement of the parties or the title giving the

usufruct;
2. Second, in case of deficiency, apply the Civil Code (Article 565);
3. In case of conflict between the rights granted a usufructuary by
virtue of a will, and codal provisions, the former, unless
repugnant to the mandatory provisions of the Civil Code, should
prevail.
CHAPTER 2
RIGHTS OF THE USUFRUCTUARY
Who shall be entitled to all the fruits of the property in

usufruct?
a) The usufructuary shall be entitled to all the fruits, natural,

industrial and civil fruits of the property in usufruct;
b) With respect to hidden treasure which may be found on the
land or tenement, he shall be considered a stranger (Article
576)
What are the rules with regard to pending natural or industrial

fruits?
a) Natural or industrial fruits growing at the time the usufruct

begins, belong to the usufructuary;
b) Those growing at the time the usufruct terminates, belong to
the owner (Article 567, pars. 1 & 2)
c) In both cases, the usufructuary, at the beginning of the
usufruct, has no obligation to refund to the owner any expenses
incurred; but the owner shall be obliged to reimburse at the
termination of the usufruct, from the proceeds of the growing
fruits, the ordinary expenses of cultivation, for seed, and other
similar expenses incurred by the usufructuary (Article 567, par.
3);
d) These provisions shall not prejudice the rights of third persons,
acquired either at the beginning or at the termination of the
usufruct (Article 567, par. 4);
e) There can be no pending civil fruits or rents for they accrue
daily (Article 569).
What is the rule if the usufructuary has leased the lands or

tenements given in usufruct?

If the usufructuary has leased the lands or tenements given in

usufruct, and the usufruct should expire before the termination of the
lease, his or her heirs and successors shall receive only the proportionate
share of the rents that must be paid by the lessees (Article 568);
[meaning the remaining period of the lease not anymore covered by the
usufruct belongs to the naked owner].
What are the rules with regard to civil fruits?
1. Civil fruits are deemed to accrue daily;

2. Civil fruits belong to the usufructuary in proportion to the time
the usufruct may last (Article 569);
3. Whenever the usufruct is constituted on the right to receive rent
or periodical pension, whether in money or in fruits, or in the
interest on bonds or securities payable to bearer, each payment
due shall be considered as the proceeds of fruits of such right
(Article 570, par. 1); and they shall be distributed as civil fruits,
and shall be applied in proportion to the time the usufruct may
last; (Articles 570, par. 3 and 569);
4. Whenever usufruct consists in the enjoyment of benefits
accruing from a participation in any industrial or commercial
enterprise, the date of the distribution of which is not fixed,
such benefits shall have the same character (Article 570, par.
2); and they shall be distributed as civil fruits, and shall be
applied in proportion to the time the usufruct may last; (Articles
570, par. 3 and 569);
Who is entitled to the enjoyment of the increases in the thing

held in usufruct?
The usufructuary shall have the right to enjoy any increase which
the thing in usufruct may acquire through:
i. Accession;
ii. Servitudes established in its favor; and
iii. All the benefits inherent in the property (Article
571).
What are the rights of the usufructuary to the thing held in

usufruct and to the usufructuary right (Article 572)?
i. He may personally enjoy the thing;

ii. He may lease the thing to another;
iii. He may alienate his right of usufruct, even by a
gratuitous title;
Provided:

All the contracts he may enter into as such usufructuary shall

terminate upon the expiration of the usufruct;
Except:
Leases of rural lands, which shall be considered as subsisting

during the agricultural year.
What usufructuary rights that cannot be alienated?
i. Those that are purely personal usufructs;

ii. Those which are subject to caucion juratoria under
Article 587;
iii. Legal usufructs such as the usufruct which parents
have over the property of their unemancipated
children, because of their nature.
What is abnormal usufruct?
It is the usufruct over things which without being consumed,

gradually deteriorate through wear and tear (Article 573), or those which
cannot be used without being consumed (Article 574). The usufructuary
does not have the obligation of preserving the form and substance of the
property which is the object of the usufruct.
A delivered to B a brand new Toyota Corolla for the latter’s use

for a period of five months. Is B liable of the car’s ordinary wear and
tear?
No, because whenever the usufruct includes things which, without

being consumed, generally deteriorate through wear and tear:
(1) The usufructuary shall have the right to make use of the thing in
accordance with the purpose for which they are intended;
(2) He shall not be obliged to return them at the termination of the
usufruct except in their condition at that time;
(3) But he shall be obliged to indemnify the owner for any
deterioration they may have suffered by reason of his fraud or
negligence (Article 573).
X gave Y the usufruct of 100 cavans of rice for the use of his
family. State the obligation of Y upon the termination of the
usufruct.

Whenever the usufruct includes things which cannot be used

without being consumed:
(1) The usufructuary shall have the right to make use of them
under the obligation of paying their appraised value at the
termination of the usufruct, if they were appraised when
delivered;
(2) In case they were not appraised, he shall have the right to
return the same quantity and quality, or pay their current
price at the time the usufruct ceases (Article 574).
May money be the object of a usufruct?
Yes, Article 574 applies.
What are the kinds of special usufructs?
iv. Of fruit bearing trees and shrubs (Artucle 575); 24

v. Of periodic pension, income, dividends (Article 570);
25
vi. Of woodland (Article 577); 26

vii. Of right of action to recover real property, real right
or movable property (Article 578); 27
Article 575. The usufructuary of fruit – bearing trees and shrubs may make use of the
24
dead trunks, and even of those cut off or uprooted by accident, under the obligation to replace
them with new plants.
25 Article 570. Whenever a usufruct is constituted on the right to receive a rent or
periodic pension, whether in money or in fruits, or in the interest on bonds or securities payable
to bearer, each payment due shall be considered as the proceeds or fruits of such right.
Whenever it consists in the enjoyment of benefits accruing from a participation in any
industrial or commercial enterprise, the date of the distribution of which is not fixed, such
benefits shall have the same character.
In either case they shall be distributed as civil fruits, and shall be applied in the manner
prescribed in the preceding article.
26 Article 577. The usufructuary of woodland may enjoy all the benefits it may produce
according to its nature.

If the woodland is a copse or consists of timber for building, the usufructuary may do
such ordinary cutting or felling as the owner was in the habit of doing. And in default of this, he
may do so in accordance with the customs of the place, as to the manner, amount and season.
In any case the felling or cutting of trees shall be made in such manner as not to prejudice
the preservation of the land.
In nurseries, the usufructuary may make the necessary thinnings in order that the
remaining trees may properly grow.
With the exception of the provisions of the preceding paragraphs, the usufructuary
cannot cut down trees unless it be to restore or improve some of the things in usufruct, and in
such case he shall first inform the owner of the necessity for the work.

viii. Of part of property owned in common (Article 582); 28

ix. Of the entire patrimony of a person (Article 598); 29
x. On mortgaged immovable (Article 600); 30
xi. On a flock or herd of livestock (Article 591). 31
What are the rights of a usufructuary of fruit bearing trees and

shrubs?
a. The usufructuary can make use of the dead trunks, and

even those cut off or uprooted by accident;
b. But he has the obligation to replace them with new plants
(Article 575);
c. If in consequence of a calamity or extraordinary event, the
trees or shrubs shall have disappeared in such
considerable number that it would not be possible to
replace them, the usufructuary may leave the dead, fallen
or uprooted trunks at the disposal of the owner, and
demand that the latter remove them and clear the land
(Article 576).
27Article 578. The usufructuary of an action to recover real property or real a real right,
or movable property, has the right to bring the action and to oblige the owner thereof to give him
the authority for this purpose and to furnish him whatever proof he may have. If in consequence
of the enforcement of the action he acquires the thing claimed, the usufruct shall be limited to the
fruits, the dominion remaining with the owner.
28 Article 582. The usufructuary of a part of a thing held in common shall exercise all the
rights pertaining to the owner thereof with respect to the administration and the collection of
fruits or interest. Should the co-ownership cease by reason of the division of the thing held in
common, the usufructuary of the part allotted to the co-owner shall belong to the usufructuary.
29 Article 598. If the usufruct be constituted on the whole patrimony, and if at the same
time of its constitution the owner has debts, the provisions of Article 758 and 759 relating to
donations shall be applied, both with respect to the maintenance of the usufruct and to the
obligation of the usufructuary to pay such debts.
30 Article 600. The usufructuary of a mortgaged immovable shall be obliged to pay the
debt for the security of which the mortgage was constituted.

Should the immovable be attached or sold judicially for the payment of the debt, the
owner shall be liable to the usufructuary for whatever the latter may lose by reason thereof.
31 Article 591. If the usufruct be constituted on a flock or herd of livestock, the
usufructuary shall be obliged to replace with the young thereof the animals that die each year
from natural causes, or are lost due to the rapacity of beasts of prey.
If the animals on which the usufruct is constituted should all perish, without the fault of
the usufructuary, on account of some contagious disease or any other uncommon event, the
usufructuary shall fulfill his obligation by delivering to the owner the remains which may have
been saved from the misfortune.
Should the herd or flock perish in part, also by accident and without the fault of the
usufructuary, the usufruct shall continue on the part saved.
Should the usufruct be on sterile animals, it shall be considered, with respect to its effect,
as though constituted on fungible things.

If the usufructuary incurs necessary, useful and ornamental

expenses, what are his rights?
(1) The usufructuary shall have the right to demand

reimbursement from the owner of all necessary expenses which
he might have incurred for the preservation of the property
(Article 546);
(2) This right, however, is not available to him with regard to useful
and ornamental expenses, but he may remove the
improvements provided that it is possible to do so without
damage to the property (Article 579);
(3) In addition, he may set off such improvements against any
damage to the same (Article 580).
CHAPTER 3. OBLIGATIONS OF THE USUFRUCTUARY
What are the obligations of the usufructuary before entering

upon the enjoyment of the property?
(1) To make, after notice to the owner or his legitimate

representative, an inventory of all the property, which shall
contain an appraisal of the movables and a description of the
condition of the immovables;
(2) To give security, binding himself to fulfill the obligations
imposed upon him (Article 583).
In usufructs, who is responsible for repairs and taxes?
(1) In the case of repairs, it depends:
a) For ordinary repairs, or those required by the natural use of

the thing and are indispensable for its preservation – the
usufructuary is responsible;
b) For extra-ordinary repairs, or those which are neither
required by the wear and tear due to the natural use of the
thing nor are indispensable for its preservation – the naked
owner is responsible (Articles 592, 593)
(2) In case of taxes, it depends:
a) For those imposed upon or which constitute a lien on the

fruits – the usufructuary is responsible;
b) For those imposed directly upon the thing or capital itself –
the naked owner is responsible (Articles 596, 597)

X donated a real property to Y, who accepted it. He however

reserved the right of usufruct. Is he required to make an inventory
or to give security?
No, because under the law, the requirements of giving security and
making an inventory do not apply to the donor of a property who
reserved the right of usufruct (Article 584).
X and Y are married. They have children A, B, and C. Y died,

hence X married Z. A, B, and C are still minors but were the
recipients of a donation from F, the father of X. Is X required to
make an inventory and give security considering that he would be a
usufructuary of said property?
Yes, because he contracted a second marriage as provided under

Article 584.
CHAPTER 4. EXTINGUISHMENT OF USUFRUCT
What are the modes of extinguishing usufructs?
(1) By the death of the usufructuary, unless a contrary intention

clearly appears;
(2) By the expiration of the period for which it was constituted, or
by the fulfillment of any resolutory condition provided in the
title creating the usufruct;
(3) By merger of the usufruct and ownership in the same person;
(4) By renunciation of the usufructuary;
(5) By the total loss of the thing in usufruct;
(6) By the termination of the right of the person constituting the
usufruct; and
(7) By prescription (Article 603).
X was granted a usufruct over a parcel of land with a building

constructed thereon. The building was totally destroyed. State the
rights of the usufructuary.
The rights of the usufructuary are:
1. He has the right to make use of the land and the materials;
2. If the owner of the land should wish to construct another
building, he shall have a right to occupy the land and make use
of the materials, but is obliged to pay the usufructuary, during
the continuance of the usufruct, the interest upon the sum

equivalent to the value of the land and of the materials (Article

607).
A was given a usufruct over a building. He shares in the

payment of the insurance over the building with the owner. In case
of loss of the building, what are his rights?
His rights are:
1. He shall continue to enjoy the new building if the owner should

construct one; or
2. He shall receive the interest on the insurance indemnity if the
owner does not wish to rebuild (Article 608).
Suppose the usufructuary refused to contribute to the

insurance over the building, state the rules.
The owner shall receive the full amount of the insurance indemnity
in case of loss, should the usufructuary have refused to contribute to the
insurance, the owner insuring the tenement alone, the latter shall receive
the full amount of the insurance indemnity in case of loss, saving always
the right granted to the usufructuary in the preceding article (Article
608, par. 2).
State the rules if the thing in usufruct is expropriated for

public use.
In such a case, the owner shall be obliged to replace it with

another thing of the same value and of similar condition or to pay the
usufructuary the legal interest on the amount of the indemnity for the
whole period of the usufruct. If the owner chooses the latter alternative,
he shall give security for the payment of the interest (Article 609).
Is the bad use of the thing in usufruct a ground to extinguish

the right?
No, under Article 610.
What is the right of the owner if there is bad use of the thing
by the usufructuary?
If the abuse should cause considerable injury to the owner, the

latter may demand that the thing be delivered to him, binding himself to
pay annually to the usfructuary the net proceeds of the same, after
deducting the expenses and the compensation which may be allowed him
for its administration (Article 610).

A, B, and C were given the usufruct of a parcel of land by X. A

and B died, leaving C alone. What is the effect of A and B’s death on
the usufruct?
Nothing. Under the law, a usufruct constituted in favor of several

persons living at the time of its constitution shall not be extinguished
until the death of the last survivor (Article 611).
Upon the termination of the usufruct, what must be done to

the thing held in usufruct?
Upon the termination of the usufruct, the thing in usufruct shall

be delivered to the owner, without prejudice to the right pertaining to the
usufructuary or his heirs for taxes and extraordinary expenses which
should be reimbursed. After the delivery has been made, the security or
mortgage shall be cancelled (Article 612).
TITLE VII. EASEMENTS AND SERVITUDES
Chapter 1. EASEMENTS IN GENERAL
Section 1. DIFFERENT KINDS OF EASEMENTS
Define easement or servitude.
An easement or servitude is an encumbrance imposed upon an

immovable for the benefit of a community or one or more persons
(personal easements [Article 614]) or for the benefit of another immovable
belonging to a different owner (real or predial easement [Article 613]).
Who are the parties to an easement?
• Dominant estate – the immovable in favor of which the easement is

established.
• Servient estate – that which is subject thereto (Par. 2, Article 613).
Distinguish easement from servitude.
• Easements is the name used in common law countries; servitude,

in civil law countries.
• An easement under common law is only one form of servitude
(servitus), the latter term being broader.

• An easement under common law is always predial or real (in favor

of realty); servitude refers to a predial or real easement upon the
one hand, or to a personal easement upon the other hand.
Note: As used in the Civil Code, however, easement is equivalent to

servitude. Term “easement” was used instead of “servitude” because the
former is better known in the Philippines and because it is the accepted
term in the English language, the Civil Code having been written in
English.
What are the characteristics of easement?
• It is a real right – therefore an action in rem is possible against the

possessor of the servient estate.
• It is imposable only on another’s property – hence, there can be no
true easement on one’s own property; thus merger in the same of
the ownership of the dominant estate extinguishes the easement.
• It is alienable – a jus in re aliena (a real right that may be alienated
although the naked ownership (nuda proprietas) is maintained.
• It is a limitation or encumbrance on the servient estate for
another’s benefit.
• There is inherence (or inseparability), from the estate to which it
belongs (Article 617).
• It is indivisible (even if the tenement be divided) [Article 618].
• It is intransmissible (unless the tenement affected be also
transmitted or alienated).
• It is perpetual (as long as the dominant and/or the servient estate
exists unless sooner extinguished by the causes enumerated by
law.
What is the nature of an easement?
By its very nature, an easement involves an abnormal restriction

on property rights of the servient owner and is regarded as a charge or
encumbrance on the servient estate, thus, easements are not presumed
but maybe imposed by law. It is incumbent upon the owner of the
dominant estate to establish by clear and convincing evidence the
presence of all the precondition before his claim for easement of right of
way may be granted. If it cannot be proven, it cannot be granted.
(Cristobal vs. CA, G.R. No. 125339, June 22, 1998).
Can there be easement on personal property?
There can be no easement imposed on personal property; only

immovables (not as defined by the Code, but those which really cannot

be moved) may be burdened with easements. Such immovables include

lands, buildings, roads.
What are the different classes of easements?
• As to recipient of benefit – Real, when the easement is in favor of

another immovable, or personal, when it is in favor of a
community, or one or more persons to who the encumbered estate
does not belong (Articles 613, 614).
• As to source – Legal, if established by law, or voluntary, if
established by the will of the owners (Article 619); and mixed, if
created partly by agreement and partly by law. Legal easements, on
the other hand, have for their object either pubic use or the
interest of private persons (Article 634).
• As to its exercise – Continuous or discontinuous, apparent or non-
apparent; positive or negative.
Continuous easements are those the use of which are or may

be incessant, without intervention of any act of man (Article 615,
par 1).
Discontinuous easements are those which are used at

intervals and depend upon the acts of man (Article 615, par. 3).
Apparent easements are those which are made known and

are continually kept in view by external signs that reveal the use
and enjoyment of the same (Article 615, par. 3).
Non-apparent easements are those which show no external

indication of their existence (Article 615, par. 4).
Positive easements are those which impose upon the owner

of the servient estate the obligation of allowing something to be
done or doing it himself (Article 615).
Negative easements are those which prohibit the owner of

the servient estate from doing something which he could lawfully
do if the easement did not exist (Article 615).
Section 2. MODES OF ACQUIRING EASEMENTS
How are easements acquired?

Continuous and apparent easements are acquired either by virtue

of a title or by prescription of ten years (Article 620), while continuous
and non-apparent easements and discontinuous easements, whether
apparent or non-apparent, can only be acquired by virtue of a title
(Article 622).
What does the term title mean?

Title does not necessarily mean a document. It means a juridical
act or law sufficient to create an encumbrance (like law donation, will,
contract)
Can an easement of right of way be acquired by prescription?
No, because it is discontinuous in character, and under the law,

only those which are both apparent and continuous can be acquired by
prescription.
How shall the period of possession be computed in order that

an easement may be acquired by prescription?
In order to acquire an easement by prescription, the time of

possession shall be computed as follows:
• In positive easements – from the day on which the owner of the

dominant estate, or the person who may have use of the easement,
commenced to exercise it upon the servient estate.
• In negative easements – from the day on which the owner of the
dominant estate forbade, by an instrument acknowledged before a
notary public, the owner of the servient estate, from executing an
act which would be lawful without the easement (Article 621).
Who makes the notarial prohibition or who should commence

the exercise of the easement?
The dominant estate, through its owner or usufructuary or

possessor or legal representative; in other words, any one who desires to
establish the easement.
A and B are neighbors. They own a party wall. A makes an

opening or window in the party wall in 2005. When can B close the
opening?
B can close it at anytime before 2015 because if by that time the

window is still open, A has already acquired the easement of light and
view by prescription of 10 years, counted from the opening of the

windows since this is a positive easement (Article 668, par. 1). A window
on a party wall is something allowed by a co-owner to be done on his own
property (owned in common) and may therefore give rise to a positive
easement or easement of sufferance.
A and B are neighbors. On his building’s wall, A opened a

window beneath the ceiling joists to admit light in 2005. In 2015,
can B still obstruct the light by constructing on his own lot a
building higher than A’s?
Yes, unless A makes a notarial prohibition prohibiting B from

making the obstruction.
If in 2005, A makes the prohibition, may B still make the

obstruction in 2012?
Yes, because it is only in 2015 (ten years after the notarial

prohibition) when A may be said to have acquired this negative easement
of light and view. After 2015, B may no longer obstruct.
Is the easement of light and view positive or negative?

It depends.
• If made on one’s own wall and the wall does not extend over the
neighbor’s land, the easement is negative (because he only does an
act of ownership, and to create an easement, a prohibition is
required.
• If made on one’s own wall which extends over the neighboring land
(invading its atmospheric area), or if made on a party wall, the
easement is created because of an act of sufferance or allowance,
thus the easement is positive.
How may the absence of proof showing the origin of

continuous non-apparent and discontinuous easements be cured?
It can be cured by a deed of recognition by the owner of the

servient estate or by a final judgment (Article 623).
What are the rules on easements that apparently exist should

they be alienated?
• Before the alienation, there is no true easement.

• After alienation:

1. There arises an easement if the sign continues to remain

there unless there is a contrary agreement. (The continuance
of the sign is the title). (Though the law says “continues”, in
reality, the easement arises for the first time, because before
the alienation, no true easement existed).
2. There is no easement if the sign is removed or if there is an
agreement to this effect (Article 625).
What is the effect of the establishment of an easement?
Upon the establishment of an easement, all the rights necessary

for its use are considered granted.
What is the requisite in order that a voluntary easement may

affect third persons?
To prejudice third persons, voluntary easements must be

registered. (Registration is not generally not essential for legal easements
since this exists as a matter of law and necessity.
What are the limitations upon the right of the owner of the
dominant estate to exercise the easement once it is acquired?
The limitations are as follows:
• First that the owner of the dominant estate cannot use the
easement except for the benefit of the immovable originally
contemplated; and
• Second, he cannot exercise it in another manner other than that
previously established (Article 626).
A was exclusively allowed by B to pass through his land. After

a while, A invited others to pass through or use the easement. Can B
prohibit the act of the others? Why?
Yes, because to allow others to pass or cross through B’s estate

would increase the burden. An easement shall be used only for the
benefit of the immovable originally contemplated and in the manner
previously established (Article 626).
Section 3.
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF THE OWNERS

OF THE DOMINANT AND SERVIENT ESTATES

What are the rights of the dominant estate?
• To exercise the easement and all necessary rights for its use
including accessory easements (Article 625).
• To make on the servient estate all works necessary for the use and
preservation of the servitude, but:
A. This must be done at his own expense;

B. He must notify the servient estate;
C. He must select convenient time and manner; and
D. He must not alter the easement nor render it more
burdensome (Article 627).
• To ask for a mandatory injunction to prevent impairment or

obstruction in the exercise of the easement when the owner of the
servient estate obstructs the right of way by building a wall or
fence.
• To renounce totally (for an easement is indivisible) the easement if
he desires exemption from contribution to expenses (Article 628).
What are the obligations of the dominant estate?
• He cannot alter the easement (Article 627).

• He cannot make it more burdensome (Article 627).
A. Thus he cannot use the easement except for movable

originally contemplated (Article 626);
B. In the easement of right of way, he cannot increase the
agreed width of the path, nor deposit soil or materials
outside of the boundaries agreed upon (for these acts would
increase the burden), but he may allow others to use the
path (this really does not increase the burden) except if the
contrary has been stipulated.
• If there be several dominant estates, each must contribute to

necessary repairs and expenses in proportion to the benefits
received by each estate (and not in proportion to the value of each
estate). (In the absence of proof, we should presume the benefits to
be equal).
• Regarding the making of repairs, he cannot use the easement
except for movable originally contemplated (Article 626).
What are the rights of the servient estate?

• To retain ownership and possession of the portion of his land

affected by the easement (Article 630) even if indemnity is given (as
in the case of easement of right of way) (Article 649), unless the
contrary has been stipulated.
• To make use of the easement, unless deprived by stipulation
provided that the exercise of the easement is not adversely affected
(Article 630) and provided further that he contributes to the
expenses in proportion to benefits received, unless there is a
contrary stipulation (Article 628, par. 2)
• To change the location of a very inconvenient easement provided
that an equally convenient substitute is made, without injury to
the dominant estate (Article 629, par. 2)
What are the obligations of the servient estate?
• He cannot impair the use of the easement (Article 629, par. 1).
• He must contribute to the expenses in case he uses the easement,
unless there is a contrary stipulation (Article 628, par. 2).
• In case of impairment, to restore conditions to the status quo at his
expense plus damages.
• To pay for the expenses incurred for the change of location or form
part of the easement (in proper case) (Article 629, par. 2).
Section 4
MODES OF EXTINGUISHMENT OF EASEMENTS
What are the modes of extinguishing easements?
Easements are extinguished:
(1) By merger in the same person of the ownership of the dominant

and servient estates;
(2) By nonuser for ten years; with respect to discontinuous
easements, this period shall be computed from the day on which they
ceased to be used; and, with respect to continuous easements, from the
day on which an act contrary to the same took place;
(3) When either or both of the estates fall into such condition that the
easement cannot be used; but it shall revive if the subsequent condition
of the estates or either of them should again permit its use, unless when
the use becomes possible, sufficient time for prescription has elapsed, in
accordance with the provisions of the preceding number;
(4) By the expiration of the term or the fulfillment of the condition, if
the easement is temporary or conditional;
(5) By the renunciation of the owner of the dominant estate;
(6) By the redemption agreed upon between the owners of the
dominant and servient estates (Article 631).

What are the other grounds for extinguishment of easement?
The modes of extinguishing easements enumerated in Article 631

are not limitative. There are other grounds not mentioned therein, such
as:
a) Expropriation of the servient estate;

b) Permanent impossibility to make use of the
easement; or permanent inutility of the
easement;
c) Annulment, rescission, or cancellation of the
title that constituted the easement;
d) Abandonment of the servient estate;
e) Resolution of the grantor to create the easement;
f) Registration of the servient estate as Free, that
is, the easement was not registered on the title;
g) In the case of a legal easement of right of way,
the opening of an adequate outlet to the highway
extinguishes the easement, if the servient owner
makes a demand for such extinguishment.
How does the use of easement prescribe?
The form or manner of using the easement may prescribe as the

easement itself, and in the same way (Article 632).
The prescription refers to (a) the form and manner of using the
easement, and (b) the easement itself. They prescribe in the same way,
meaning possession or use of ten years. On the other hand, easement
may be extinguished by non-user for ten years (Article 631, par. 2).
Would the non-user by some co-owners of the dominant estate

result in prescription?
If the dominant estate belongs to several persons in common, the

use of the easement by any one of them prevents prescription with
respect to the others (Article 633).
The non-use by some will not result in partial extinguishment

because of the indivisibility of the easement (Article 618)
Chapter 2
LEGAL EASEMENTS
Section 1

GENERAL PROVISIONS
What are legal easements?
They are easements imposed by law, and which have for their
object either for public use or the interest of private persons (Article 634).
An easement is an encumbrance imposed upon an immovable for

the benefit of a community or one or more persons, or for the benefit of
another immovable owned by another person.
If an easement is imposed by law, it is known as legal easement.

When it is constituted by the agreement of the owners of the dominant
estate and the servient estate or by will, it is known as voluntary
easement (Articles 688-693). When it is partly constituted by agreement
and partly by law, it is known as a mixed easement.
What are the kinds of legal easements?
There are eight (8) legal easements under the Civil Code:
• Easements relating to waters (Articles 637-648);

• Right of way (Articles 649-657);
• Party wall (Articles 658-666);
• Light and view (Articles 667-673);
• Drainage (Articles 674-676)
• Intermediate distances (Articles 677-681);
• Easements against nuisance (Articles 682-683);
• Lateral and subjacent support (Articles 684-687)
What governs legal easements for private persons or private

use?
Easements established by law in the interest of private persons or

for private use shall be governed by:
• The provisions of Title VII (Easements or Servitudes). This is

without prejudice to the provisions of general or local laws and
ordinances for the general welfare. The latter prevails over the Civil
Code in case of conflict as long as the aim of the local laws and
ordinances is the general welfare of the public or community;
• Agreements of the interested parties, if they had so desired to
modify the easements, and the modification is not prohibited by
law, or no injury will be suffered by a third person (Article 636).

Section 2
EASEMENTS RELATING TO WATERS
What are the kinds of legal easements relating to waters?
• Natural drainage of lands (Article 50 of the Water Code,

amending Article 637 of the Civil Code);
• Natural drainage of buildings (Article 674);
• Easements of riparian banks of navigation, floatage, fishing,
salvage (Article 51 of the Water Code, amending Article 638
of the Civil Code);
• Easement of a dam (Articles 639, 647);
• Easement for drawing water or for watering animals (Articles
640-641);
• Easement of aqueduct (Articles 643-646);
• Easement for the construction of a stop lock or sluice gate
(Article 647).
What are the obligations of the servient estate (legal easement

for natural drainage of lands)? 32
The servient estates, which are the lower estates have the
obligation to receive not only the waters that naturally flow from the
dominant estates (higher estates), but also the stones and soils flowing
with them. Waters collected artificially in reservoirs or private dams are
not included because in such cases the element of human intervention is
32 Article 637 (Repealed). The repealing law provides:
Article 50. Lower estates are obliged to receive the waters which naturally and without
the intervention of man descend from the higher estates, as well as the stones or earth which they
carry with them.
The owner of the lower estate cannot construct works which will impede this natural
flow, unless he provides an alternative method of drainage; neither can the owner of the higher
estate make works which will increase their natural flow (P.D. No. 1067, Water Code) (Source:
Article 637 with an amendment. By way of exception, the servient estate may now construct
works which may obstruct the natural flow of the waters as long as an alternative drainage has
been provided.)
Article 637. Lower estates are obliged to receive the waters which naturally and without
the intervention of man descend from the higher estates, as well as the stones or earth which they
carry with them.
The owner of the lower estate cannot construct works which will impede this easement;
neither can the owner of the higher estate make works which will increase the burden.

present. Servient estates can refuse to accept such waters and the
elements which the waters carry.
By reason of the obligation to receive the waters together with the

stones and soils naturally flowing form the higher estates, the servient
estates cannot do any of the following:
• Construction of works that will impede the easement or which will

divert the flow of the waters and burden any tenement without
providing for an alternative route of drainage.
• Enclosure of the land by ditches and fences to impede the flow of
the waters (Lunod vs. Meneses, 11 Phil. 128). However, in Ongsiaco
vs. Ongsiaco, 101 Phil. 1196, the easement was held to have been
extinguished for non-user, when the dominant estate failed to file
an action to demolish the dike within ten years.
What are the obligations of the dominant estates?
• The owner of the dominant estates cannot cause the construction

of works which will intensify the burden of the servient estates
such as increasing the velocity or speed of the descent. They are,
however, allowed to construct works that will be beneficial to the
servient estates, such as works designed to prevent erosion of the
land.
• They must compensate the owners of the servient estates if the
waters are the result of an overflow from irrigation dams, or the
result of artificial descent done by man and damages caused by
reason thereof.
There will be no indemnity if the conditions laid down in the law

had been complied with by the dominant estate.
What are the easements covered on riparian banks? 33
33 Article 638 has been repealed by Article 51 of PD 1067 (Water Code)
Article 51. The banks of rivers and streams and the shores of the seas and lakes
throughout their entire length and within a zone of three (3) meters in urban areas, twenty (20)
meters in agricultural areas and forty (40) meters in forest areas, along their margins, are subject
to the easement of public use in the interest of recreation, navigation, floatage, fishing and
salvage. No person shall be allowed to stay in this zone longer than what is necessary for
recreation, navigation, floatage, fishing or salvage or to build structures of any kind.
Article 638. The banks of rivers and streams, even in case they are of private ownership,
are subject throughout their entire length and within a zone of three meters along their margins,
to the easement of public use in the general interest of navigation, floatage, fishing and salvage.

• Easement of public use in the interest of recreation;

• Navigation;
• Floatage;
• Fishing;
• Salvage
What is the width of zone subject to easements on banks of

rivers, streams, shores of seas and lakes?
• Urban areas – 3 meters;

• Agricultural areas – 20 meters;
• Forest areas – 40 meters;
The above measurements follow the entire length of the rivers,

streams, shores, seas and lakes along their margins.
The construction of any structures of any kind on the zones is

prohibited. And the length of stay on the areas cannot be longer than
what is necessary for the purpose indicated.
What is easement of abutment of a dam?
Whenever for the diversion or taking of water from a river or brook,

or for the use of any other continuous or discontinuous stream, it should
be necessary to build a dam, and the person who is to construct it is not
the owner of the banks, or lands which must support it, he may
establish the easement of abutment of a dam, after payment of the
proper indemnity (Article 639).
If the dam is constructed without permission of the owner of the

land where it was constructed, the latter can have it demolished as a
nuisance (Solis vs. Pujeda, 42 Phil. 687).
What are compulsory easements for drawing water or for

watering animals?
Compulsory easements for drawing water or for watering animals

can be imposed only for reasons of public use in favor of a town or
village, after payment of the proper indemnity (Article 640).
Estates adjoining the banks of navigable or floatable rivers are, furthermore, subject to
the easement of towpath for the exclusive service of river navigation and floatage.
If it be necessary for such purpose to occupy lands of private ownership, the proper
indemnity shall first be paid.

These two easements can be imposed only for reasons of public

use and not for the private use of one or a few persons. The easements
which are compulsory are allowed only in favor of a town or village. A
town refers to a municipality. A village refers to a barrio or barangay, or
to a well populated community. The reason of the law is the facilitation of
the establishments of rural towns and barrios by the convenience of
access to water needed.
What are the easements (and obligations) imposed on the

servient estate for drawing water and for watering animals?
Easements for drawing water and for watering animals carry with
them the obligation of the owners of the servient estates to allow passage
to persons and animals to the place where such easements are to be
used, and the indemnity shall include this service (Artic le 641).
The width of the implied right of way cannot exceed ten (10) meters
(Article 657, last par.).
What is easement of aqueduct?
Any person who may wish to use upon his own estate any water of
which he can dispose shall have the right to make it flow through the
intervening estates, with the obligation to indemnify their owners, as well
as the owners of the lower estates upon which the waters may filter or
descend (Article 642).
Definition of aqueduct – An aqueduct is a conduit or artificial

channel for conducting water from a distance. The Article speaks of a
compulsory easement of aqueduct.
What are the obligations of the owner of the dominant estate

who exercises the right of easement of aqueduct?
One desiring to make use of the right granted in the preceding

article is obliged:
(1) To prove that he can dispose of the water and that it is

sufficient for the use for which it is intended;
(2) To show that the proposed right of way is the most
convenient and the least onerous to third persons;
(3) To indemnify the owner of the servient estate in the manner
determined by the laws and regulations (Article 643).
The absence of any one of these requirements will prevent the

imposition of the easement of aqueduct on the intervening estates.

Note that the existence of an easement of right of way does not

necessarily include the easement of aqueduct.
What are the restrictions on easement of aqueduct if the same

is for private interest only?
The easement of aqueduct for private interest cannot be imposed

on buildings, courtyards, annexes, or outhouses, or on orchards or
gardens already existing (Article 644).
If an easement of aqueduct will be allowed to burden the said

properties, there will be an invasion of the privacy of the premises of the
owners thereof. However, if the easement of aqueduct is for the benefit of
the public use or community, it can be imposed on the said enumerated
properties. Public interest prevails over private interest.
What are the rights of the servient estate despite the

existence of easement of aqueduct?
The easement of aqueduct does not prevent the owner of the

servient estate from (1) closing or fencing it, or (2) from building over the
aqueduct; provided that (10 no damage is caused to the aqueduct; or,
repairs and cleanings of the aqueduct shall not be rendered impossible
(Article 645).
The easement of aqueduct does not prevent the owner of the

servient estate from closing or fencing it, or from building over the
aqueduct in such manner as not to cause the latter any damage, or
render necessary repairs and cleanings impossible.
For legal purposes, how is easement of aqueduct considered?
For legal purposes, the easement of aqueduct shall be considered

as continuous and apparent, even though the flow of the water may not
be continuous, or its use depends upon the needs of the dominant
estate, or upon a schedule of alternate days or hours (Article 646).
As such, the easement may be acquired by title or by prescription

of ten years (Article 620).
Note: Since under the Water Code (Articles 5 and 6), all waters
belong to the State, an easement of aqueduct could no longer be acquired
by prescription, unless the waters involved take the nature of patrimonial
property of the State.

What are the requirements for the establishment of stop lock

or sluice gate in the bed of a stream?
One who for the purpose of irrigating or improving his estate, has
to construct a stop lock or sluice gate in the bed of the stream from
which the water is to be taken, may demand that the owners of the
banks permit its construction, after payment of damages, including those
caused by the new easement to such owners and to the other irrigators
(Article 647).
What is the prevailing law on waters? 34
The establishment, extent, form and conditions of easements of

water not expressly determined by the provisions of this code (PD 1067,
Water Code) shall be governed by the provisions of the Civil Code (Article
52, PD 1067).
The Water Code (PD 1067) is now the main special law involving
waters. In case of conflict between the Water Code and the Civil Code,
the Water Code shall prevail being the latter in point of time. However,
the Civil Code shall remain the prevailing law in case of conflict on the
following matters:
• Establishment of easement of waters;

• Extent of easement of waters;
• Form of easement of waters;
• Conditions of easement of waters
- provided these matters have not been expressly determined

by the Water Code.
Section 3
EASEMENT OF RIGHT OF WAY
What is easement of right of way?
It is an easement or privilege by which one person or a particular

class of persons is allowed to pass over another’s land, usually thru one
particular path or line. The term ‘right of way’, upon the other hand, may
34
Article 648 has been repealed by Article 52 of PD 1067.
Article 648. The establishment, extent, form and conditions of the servitudes of waters, to
which this section refers, shall be governed by the special laws relating thereto insofar as no
provision therefor is made in this Code.

refer either to the easement itself, or simply, to the strip of land over
which passage can be done.
What are the requisites for easement of right of way?
(1) That the dominant estate is surrounded by other immovables

and has no adequate outlet to a public highway (Art. 649, par. 1);
(2) After payment of proper indemnity (Art. 649, par. 1);
(3) That the isolation was not due to acts of the proprietor of the
dominant estate (Art. 649, last par.); and,
(4) That the right of way claimed is at the point least prejudicial to
the servient estate; and insofar as consistent with this rule, where the
distance from the dominant estate to a public highway may be the
shortest (Art. 650). 35
Notes:
- The burden of providing the existence of the prerequisites
to validly claim a compulsory right of way lies on the owner
of the dominant estate. 36
- In order to justify the imposition of the servitude of right of
way, there must be a real, not a fictitious or artificial
necessity for it. Mere convenience for the dominant estate is
not what is required by law as the basis for setting up a
compulsory easement. Even in the face of a necessity, if it
can be satisfied without imposing the servitude, the same
should not be imposed. This easement can also be
established for the benefit of a tenement with an
inadequate outlet, but not when the outlet is merely
inconvenient.37
- In the case of Ramos v. Gatchalian, G.R. No. 75905, October
12, 1987, 154 SCRA 703, the Supreme Court denied access
to Sucat Road through Gatchalian Avenue in view of the
fact that petitioner had a road right of way provided by the
Sobrina Rodriguez Lombos Subdivision indicated as Lot
4133-G-12 in its subdivision plan for the buyers of its lots,
notwithstanding that said lot was still undeveloped and
inconvenient to petitioner. Even if Ramos, the petitioner
therein, had "to pass through other lots belonging to other
35 Simeon Floro vs. Orlando A. Llenado, G.R. No. 75723, June 2, 1995.
36 Simeon Floro vs. Orlando A. Llenado, Supra.
37 Ibid.

owners, which are grassy and cogonal, as temporary

ingress/egress with great inconvenience particularly due to
flood and mud," the Court did not allow the easement
because it would run counter to existing jurisprudence that
mere convenience for the dominant estate does not suffice
to serve as basis for the servitude. This ruling was
reiterated in Rivera v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No.
74249, January 20, 1989, 169 SCRA 307, 313 and
Constabella Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 80511,
January 25, 1991, 193 SCRA 333, 339.
- Legal easement does not depend upon the consent of the
servient owner or owners.
- Generally, an easement of right of way is compulsory.
However, by way of exception, if the isolation of the
immovable is due to the acts of the owner of the immovable
(supposed dominant estate), the easement is not
compulsory. There is no legal obligation on the part of the
servient estate to grant right of way.
- If the outlet to a highway is through water, like river, lake
or sea, and the same is not dangerous to cross nor do they
pose grave inconvenience, the right of way should not be
granted. If the waterway is too expensive, it is as if there is
no available outlet to the highway. In which case, the right
of way is grantable.
How shall the indemnity to be paid by the owner of the

dominant estate to the owner of the servient estate be assessed?
- If the passage is permanent, pay the value of land occupied

by the path plus damages. Upon extinction of the
easement, the indemnity is returned without interest, for
the interest is considered rent (Article 655).
- If temporary, pay for the damages caused. It is temporary
when, for example, the estate is not being cultivated the
whole year round, and when harvesting is only once in a
while (Article 649, 3rd par.), or when the carrying of
materials is needed to improve a building (Article 656).
What are the two different instances where indemnity is not

required?
Whenever a piece of land acquired by sale, exchange or partition, is

surrounded by other estates of the vendor, exchanger, or co-owner, he
shall be obliged to grant a right of way without indemnity.

In case of a simple donation, the donor shall be indemnified by the

donee for the establishment of the right of way (Article 652).
What is the rule if the grantor’s or grantee’s land is enclosed?
In the case of the preceding article, if it is the land of the grantor

that becomes isolated, he may demand a right of way after paying a
indemnity. However, the donor shall not be liable for indemnity (Article
653).
Example:
X sold a parcel of land to Y, but it is surrounded by X’s land. What

is the right of Y? He can demand a right of way without indemnity.
Suppose the property given to Y was donated, will your answer be

the same? No, because in this case, the donor shall be indemnified.
Who bears the expenses for taxes, and repairs of the right of
way?
- Even though permanent, the path belongs to the servient
estate, and he pays all the taxes.
- But the dominant estate should pay for the repairs and
should pay for the proportionate share of taxes to the
servient estate. Proportionate means the whole tax for the
whole estate (Article 654).
What is the effect upon the right of way if the owner of the
dominant estate has joined his estate to another abutting on a
public road, or if a new road is opened giving it access?
The easement is extinguished provided that the servient estate

demands and so long as the public highway substantially meets the
needs of the dominant estate, and provided he returns what he may have
received by way of indemnity. The interest on the indemnity shall be
deemed to be in payment of rent for the use of the easement.
Causes for extinguishment of the easement of right of way:

- Opening of a new road (Article 655, par. 2);
- Joining the dominant estate to another (that is the latter
becomes also the property of the dominant owner) which
abuts, and therefore has access to the public highway
(Article 655, par. 1) But the new access must be adequate
and convenient.

Notes:
- Extinguishment is not automatic, because the law says that

the servient owner “may demand”. It follows that if he
chooses not to demand, the easement remains and he has
not duty to refund the indemnity.
- The Article applies only to the legal or compulsory easement
of right of way, not to a voluntary one.
What are the maximum widths for easement of way for the
passage of livestock?
- Animal path – 75 meters;

- Animal trail – 37 meters and 50 centimeters;
- Cattle – 10 meters (unless prior to the old Civil Code, vested
rights had been acquired to a greater width)
What are the requisites for easement of right of way for the
passage of livestock?
- Payment of indemnity;
- The easement can be imposed only for reasons of public
use in favor of a town or village (Articles 640 and 641)
Section 4
EASEMENT OF PARTY WALL
What is a party wall?
This is a wall at the dividing line of estates. Co-ownership governs

the wall, hence the party wall is necessarily a common wall.
What are the rules that govern easement of party wall?
- Provisions of the Civil Code on Title VII (Easements and

Servitudes);
- Local ordinances and customs which do not conflict with
the provisions of the Civil Code on Title VII;
- Provisions of the Civil Code in Co-ownership (Articles 484 to
501)
When is an easement of a party wall presumed to exist?
The existence of an easement of party wall is presumed, unless

there is a title, or exterior sign, or proof to the contrary:

(1) In dividing walls of adjoining buildings up to the point of

common elevation;
(2) In dividing walls of gardens or yards situated in cities,
towns, or in rural communities;
(3) In fences, walls and live hedges dividing rural lands (Article
659).
How may the presumption rebutted?
- Title to the contrary;

- Exterior signs to the contrary;
- Proof to the contrary.
What is the rule in case of conflict between a title and exterior

sign?
A title conferring (expressly) ownership in one owner prevails over a

mere exterior sign (from which, there is merely an inference).
What are exterior signs negativing the existence of a party

wall?
It is understood that there is an exterior sign, contrary to the
easement of party wall:
(1) Whenever in the dividing wall of buildings there is a window

or opening;
(2) Whenever the dividing wall is, on one side, straight and
plumb on all its facement, and on the other, it has similar conditions on
the upper part, but the lower part slants or projects outward;
(3) Whenever the entire wall is built within the boundaries of
one of the estates;
(4) Whenever the dividing wall bears the burden of the binding
beams, floors and roof frame of one of the buildings, but not those of the
others;
(5) Whenever the dividing wall between courtyards, gardens,
and tenements is constructed in such a way that the coping sheds the
water upon only one of the estates;
(6) Whenever the dividing wall, being built of masonry, has
stepping stones, which at certain intervals project from the surface on
one side only, but not on the other;
(7) Whenever lands inclosed by fences or live hedges adjoin
others which are not inclosed.

In all these cases, the ownership of the walls, fences or hedges

shall be deemed to belong exclusively to the owner of the property or
tenement which has in its favor the presumption based on any one of
these signs (Article 660).
What is the (rebuttable) presumption as to ditches or drains?
Ditches or drains opened between two estates are also presumed

as common to both, if there is no title or sign showing the contrary.
There is a sign contrary to the part-ownership whenever the earth

or dirt removed to open the ditch or to clean it is only on one side
thereof, in which case the ownership of the ditch shall belong exclusively
to the owner of the land having this exterior sign in its favor (Article 661).
Who bears the cost of repairs on and construction of the party

wall?
The cost of repairs and construction of party walls and the
maintenance of fences, live hedges, ditches, and drains owned in
common, shall be borne by all the owners of the lands or tenements
having the party wall in their favor, in proportion to the right of each
(Article 622, par. 1).
How may the co-owner exempt himself from contributing to

this charge?
Nevertheless, any owner may exempt himself from contributing to
this charge by renouncing his part-ownership, except when the party
wall supports a building belonging to him (Article 662).
What are the requisites for the renunciation of the share?
- It must be total or complete (not partial) (The rule is

different in ordinary co-ownership where partial
renunciation is allowed);
- It must be made voluntarily and with full knowledge of the
facts;
- It must be made before the expenses are incurred;
- It is made with the implied condition that the other owner
should make or pay for the repairs;
- It must be of both the share in the wall and the share in the
land, for the wall cannot be used without the land.
What is the rule if the owner of a building supported by a party

wall desires to demolish the building?

If the owner of a building, supported by a party wall desires to

demolish the building, he may also renounce his part-ownership of the
wall, but the cost of all repairs and work necessary to prevent any
damage which the demolition may cause to the party wall, on this
occasion only, shall be borne by him (Artic le 663).
May an owner increase the height of a party wall?
Every owner may increase the height of the party wall, provided
that:
- He does so at his own expense;

- He pays for any damage which may be caused by the work,
even though such damage be temporary;
- He bears the expenses of maintaining the wall in the part
newly raised or deepened at its foundation shall also be
paid for by him;
- He pays for the indemnity for the increased expenses which
may be necessary for the preservation of the party wall by
reason of the greater height or depth which has been given
it;
- If the party wall cannot bear the increased height, the
owner desiring to raise it shall be obliged to reconstruct it
at his own expense;
- If for this purpose it be necessary to make it thicker, he
shall give the space required from his own land (Article
664).
He will however be the exclusive owner of the additions unless

Article 665 is availed of.
How may the other owners acquire part-ownership in the
additions?
The other owners who have not contributed in giving increased
height, depth or thickness to the wall may, nevertheless, acquire the
right of part-ownership therein, by paying proportionally the value
of the work at the time of the acquisition and of the land used for
its increased thickness (Article 665).
What is the right of every part-owner of a party wall as to its

use?
Every part-owner of a party wall may use it in proportion to the

right he may have in the co-ownership, without interfering with the
common and respective uses by the other co-owners (Article 666).

Section 5
EASEMENT OF LIGHT AND VIEW
What is the prohibition on part-owners on party walls?
No part-owner may, without the consent of the others, open

through the party wall any window or aperture of any kind (Article 667)
An opening in a party wall up to the point of common elevation is

an exterior sign contradicting the existence of an easement of party wall
(Article 660, par. 1). This means that the wall is exclusively owned by the
person favored by the presence of exterior sign.
How shall the period of prescription for the acquisition of an

easement of light and view be counted?
The period of prescription for the acquisition of an easement of

light and view shall be counted:
(1) From the time of the opening of the window, if it is through a

party wall; or
(2) From the time of the formal prohibition upon the proprietor
of the adjoining land or tenement, if the window is through a wall on the
dominant estate (Article 668).
When is an easement of light and view positive and when is it

negative?
- Positive – if the window is thru a party wall (Article 668,

par. 1). Therefore, the period of prescription commences
from the time the window is opened. (The mere opening of
the window does not create an easement; it is only after a
sufficient lapse of time the window still remains open, that
the easement of light and view is created (Article 668, par.
1).
- Negative – if the window is thru one’s own wall, that is, thru
a wall of the dominant estate (Article 668, par. 2).
Therefore, the time for the period of prescription should
begin from the time of notarial prohibition upon the
adjoining owner.
Exception: Although the window is on the wall of the dominant

estates till the easement of light and view would be positive if the window
is on the balcony or extension extending over the land of the servient
estate. In such case, there is no need of notarial prohibition.

What are restricted windows?
When the distances in article 670 are not observed, the owner of a
wall which is not party wall, adjoining a tenement or piece of land
belonging to another, can make in it openings to admit light, provided
that:
- The opening must be at the height of the ceiling joints or

immediately under the ceiling
- The maximum size is 30 centimeters square (not more than
30 cm length or width)
- It must be with an iron grating imbedded in the wall;
- It must be with a wire screen (Article 669).
Nevertheless, the owner of the tenement or property adjoining the

wall in which the openings are made can close them should he acquire
part-ownership thereof, if there be no stipulation to the contrary.
What are the sanctions for violations?
The adjoining owner can compel the dominant owner to close the
opening, or to comply with the requirements. If the servient owner has
not protested for ten years from the opening of the apertures, his action
to compel for closure is deemed prescribed.
However, this does not mean that the servient owner could not
construct a building on his own land which will obstruct the light and
view of the dominant owner. The easement is negative, there is need of
notarial prohibition unto the servient owner.
If none had been made, or if one had been made but the required
10 year period for prescription had not elapsed, the servient owner can
obstruct the light and view of the dominant owner by:
- constructing a building on his land, or

- raising a wall thereon contiguous to the wall of the
dominant owners. (Article 669, last par).
However, the servient owner cannot obstruct the opening for light,
if an easement of light had already been acquired by the dominant owner
through (a) prescription or (b) by stipulation occasioned by the
acquisition of part-ownership of the wall by the sevient owner (Article
669, par. 2).

If the owner of a building would like to have a window or

balcony which will either give him a direct or oblique view over an
adjoining tenement, what distance must be observed?
No windows, apertures, balconies, or other similar projections

which afford a direct view upon or towards an adjoining land or tenement
can be made, without leaving a distance of two meters between the wall
in which they are made and such contiguous property.
Neither can side or oblique views upon or towards such

conterminous property be had, unless there be a distance of sixty
centimeters.
The nonobservance of these distances does not give rise to

prescription (Article 670).
Article 670 applies only to windows, apertures, balconies or other

similar projections affording a direct view upon the adjoining land or
tenement. The required minimum distances of these structures to the
boundary line is 2 meters if the view is direct and 60 meters of the view
is oblique.
What are the distinctions between the openings in Article 669

and those in Article 670?
The openings in Article 669 are irregular windows and smaller in

size and they are intended purely for admission of light; while the
openings in Article 670 are regular windows and are intended both for
light and view.
How shall the distances in Article 670 be measured in cases of

direct and oblique views?
The distances referred to in the preceding article shall be measured

in cases of direct views from the outer line of the wall when the openings
do not project, from the outer line of the latter when they do, and in
cases of oblique view from the dividing line between the two properties
(Article 671).
How is direct view distinguished from oblique view?
- Direct view is the gaining of direct sight from an opening in

a wall parallel to the boundary line without having to
extend out or turn one’s head to see the adjoining

tenement. Here, there is an effortless act of seeing the

parallel tenement.
However, it is not necessary always that the wall sustaining

the opening and the dividing line be exactly and
geometrically parallel.
- Oblique or side view is the gaining of sight of other

tenement from an opening made at an angle with the
boundary line, such that to be able to see the adjoining
tenement, there is a necessity for putting out or turning
one’s head either to the lefty or to the right.
What is the rule when the buildings are separated by a public

way or alley?
The provisions of article 670 are not applicable to buildings

separated by a public way or alley, which is not less than three meters
wide, subject to special regulations and local ordinances (Article 672).
There must be a minimum distance of 3 meters.
Suppose that an easement of light and view has been acquired,

what is the distance which must be observed by the owner of the
servient estate if he desires to construct a house on his own
property?
Whenever by any title a right has been acquired to have direct

views, balconies or belvederes overlooking an adjoining property, the
owner of the servient estate cannot build thereon at less than a distance
of three meters to be measured in the manner provided in article 671.
Any stipulation permitting distances less than those prescribed in article
670 is void (Article 673).
The article refers to the acquisition of easement of restraint
prohibiting the servient owner from building any structure on his land at
a distance of less than 3 meters measured from the boundary line of the
two estates. This is true servitude.
The acquisition is by title which means by agreement, donation,

will or prescription. What has been acquired by title is a right (a) to have
direct views; (b) to have and maintain balconies; or (c) belvederes
overlooking the adjoining tenement.
SECTION 6

DRAINAGE OF BUILDINGS
What are the restrictions of the servient owner with respect to

easement of drainage of buildings?
The owner of a building shall be obliged:
- To construct its roof or covering in such manner that the

rain water shall fall on his own land or on a street or public
place, and not on the land of his neighbor, even though the
adjacent land may belong to two or more persons, one of
whom is the owner of the roof.
- Even if it should fall on his own land, the owner shall be
obliged to collect the water in such a way as not to cause
damage to the adjacent land or tenement (Article 674).
What are the restrictions, if any, of the dominant owner?
The dominant owner, who has on his favor an easement of

drainage constituted on a specified area of the servient estate for the
drainage of rain water, is not allowed to construct a building with a roof
protruding over the stipulated area subject of the easement (Purugganan
vs. Paredes, 69 SCRA 69).
Note that this Article is not really create an easement as it merely

regulates use of a person’s property insofar as rain water is concerned.
What is the obligation of the servient owner with respect to

the easement of receiving water falling from roofs?
The servient owner should provide an outlet for the passage of

falling water to a public street or in accordance with the regulations to
local ordinances or customs to prevent damage to the dominant estate
(Article 675).
This applies to places where buildings are constructed on

mountainous or elevated areas and the roofings of these existing
buildings are of different heights. Those in the lower areas may be
receiving in their roofs rain water coming or falling form neighboring
roofs.

What is the rule if a yard or court of a house is surrounded by

other houses and there is no outlet for the drainage of rain water
collected therein?
The owner of said property can demand the establishment of an

easement of drainage from the neighboring estates:
- To give an outlet to the water at the point of the contiguous

lands or tenements where its egress may be easiest, and
- To establish a conduit for the drainage
Before these can be demanded, the following conditions must be

present:
- The outlet must be at the point of easiest egress;

- It must cause the least damage to the servient estate;
- There must be payment of the proper indemnity.
The easement referred to in this Article (which is compulsory after

payment of indemnity) may be complied with by following Article 675.
SECTION 7
INTERMEDIATE DISTANCES AND WORKS FOR CERTAIN
CONSTRUCTIONS AND PLANTINGS
What are the limitations with regard to constructions near

fortified places?
No constructions can be built or plantings made near fortified

places or fortresses without compliance with the conditions required in
special laws, ordinances, and regulations relating thereto (Article 677).
A fortress is a military structure of the State against foreign

aggression. For reasons of public security and safety, the law prohibits
the construction of buildings, the planting of trees, shrubs, etc. near
these fortresses. The panoramic vision of guards should not be
obstructed or blocked with any standing objects.
What are the prescribed distances in the construction of any

aqueduct, well, sewer, furnaces, forge, chimney, stable, depository
corrosive substances, machinery or factory which by its nature or
products is dangerous or noxious?

- The distances prescribed by the regulations and customs of

the place must be observed.
- The adjoining proprietors cannot stipulate with the builder
or maker that they are renouncing or waiving any objection
to the illegal constructions. Such stipulation is void for
being against public policy, for the State is under obligation
to promote and maintain the general welfare of the people.
- If there are no regulations or customs in the place that
could be applied, necessary precautions should be taken by
the builder or maker to prevent any damage to the
neighboring lands or tenement (Article 678)
- Illegal structures can be ordered demolished and the one
who caused their establishment could be liable for
damages.
What are the distances to be observed in the planting of trees?
- If there are ordinances or customs: Follow the distance

authorized by the ordinances in the locality; if there are
none, follow the generally accepted customs in the place.
- If there are no ordinances or customs:
When tall trees are planted – at least 2 meters from the
dividing line of the two estates measured to the center
of the tree.
When small trees or shrubs are planted – at least 50
centimeters from the dividing line of the two estates
measured to the center of the tree (Article 679)
What is the remedy in case of violation?
In case of violation of the law, ordinances or customs, the

neighboring land owners can demand the removal of the trees illegally
planted. This remedy also apples to tree which have grown
spontaneously, that is, without any though of planting them in the
tenement of the servient owner (Article 679, par. 3).
What are the rights of the owner of the neighboring estate to

over-extending tree branches or roots?
- If the branches of any tree should extend over a
neighboring estate, tenement, garden or yard, the owner of
the latter shall have the right to demand that they be cut off
insofar as they may spread over his property;
- If it be the roots of a neighboring tree which should
penetrate into the land of another, the latter may cut them
off himself within his property (Article 680). The

justification for this is that by accession, he became the

owner of the roots and as owner, he has the right to destroy
them.
- The branches and roots of trees which have intruded into
the boundaries of the adjacent tenements can be cut down
by the owner of said trees even if the comforting shade
enjoyed by the adjacent tenement would be done away with.
This is his indisputable right being the owner thereof
(Crudo vs. Mancilla, et al., 37 O.G. No. 104, p. 2089).
What is the rule as to falling fruits?
When the branches of a fruit bearing tree extend over the tenement
of a neighbor, fruits naturally falling upon adjacent land belong to the
owner of said land (Article 681).
The falling of the fruits must not be induced such as by forceful

shaking of the tree or its branches, or by the use of gathering poles or
sticks. Such act will constitute theft of fruits.
When still hanging, the fruits belong to the owner of the tree. But
once they naturally fall on the ground of the neighboring tenement, they
pertain to the latter. The mode of acquisition by the neighbor is by law
(Article 712).
SECTION 8
EASEMENT AGAINST NUISANCE
What is easement against nuisance?
Every building or piece of land is subject to the easement which

prohibits the proprietor or possessor from committing nuisance through
noise, jarring, offensive odor, smoke, heat, dust, water, glare and other
causes (Article 682).
Who are servient and dominant in an easement against

nuisance?
The proprietor or possessor of the building or piece of land, who

commits the nuisance through noise, jarring, offensive odor, etc. is the
servient in an easement against nuisance; in another sense, the building
or the land itself is the servient estate, since the easement is inherent in
every building or land.

The dominant is the general public, or anybody injured by the

nuisance.
What are the restrictions on establishment of factories and

shops?
Industrial factories and commercial shops may be established

subject to regulation on:
- zoning,
- health,
- police, and
- other laws and regulations,
- the least possible annoyance caused to the neighborhood
(Article 683).
SECTION 9
LATERAL AND SUBJACENT SUPPORT
What is easement on lateral and subjacent support?
No proprietor shall make such excavations upon his land as to

deprive any adjacent land or building of sufficient lateral or subjacent
support (Article 684).
What lateral and subjacent supports?
Lateral support – this is the support on the vertical side of a land,

the removal of which may cause the land to crumble or slide. If there is a
building on the land, the lateral pressure on the land becomes greater.
The removal of the lateral support of the land where a building stands
may trigger the weakening of the foundation and cause the collapse of
the building.
Subjacent support – this is the horizontal support underneath a

land or building the removal of which may cause the sinking or
crumbling of the land or building.
What are the remedies of the adjacent owner?
The remedies of the adjoining owners against dangerous

excavations are:

- Injunction before the excavation had been consummated;

and
- Claim for damages for the injuries sustained.
What is the effect of owner’s consent to excavations dangerous

to adjacent land or building?
Any stipulation or testamentary provision allowing excavations

that cause danger to an adjacent land or building shall be void (Article
685).
What is the extent of the legal easement of lateral and

subjacent support?
The legal easement of lateral and subjacent support is not only for
buildings standing at the time the excavations are made but also for
constructions that may be erected (Article 686).
What is the requirement before a proprietor can make any

excavation?
Any proprietor intending to make any excavation contemplated in

the three preceding articles shall notify all owners of adjacent lands
(Article 687).
It must be noted that the giving of notice to the adjacent owners is

merely an additional precaution. It is not a substitute for one’s duty to
exercise reasonable care to avoid injury to the adjacent lands or
buildings.
CHAPTER 3
VOLUNTARY EASEMENTS
What are the restrictions of an owner’s right to constitute

easement?
Every owner of a tenement or piece of land may establish thereon

the easements which he may deem suitable, and in the manner and form
which he may deem best, provided he does not contravene the laws,
public policy or public order (Article 688).
What is perdial servitude?

This servitude is a charge laid on the estate for the use and utility
of another estate belonging to another owner; a charge on one estate for
the stipulated benefit of another estate; the benefit must be attributed to
any person who may own the dominant estate at any time.
In voluntary easements, who acts for the dominant estate?
- Only the owner or someone else, in the name of and with

the authority of the owner, may establish a voluntary
predial servitude on his estate, for this is an act of
ownership.
- In case the property is subject to a usufruct, to create a
permanent or perpetual voluntary easement, the owner
needs the consent of the usufructuary because the latter
has a real right over the property which is entitled to
respect.
- If the title of one who constituted the servitude is annulled,
the servitude is extinguished because only an owner can
create a servitude on a property.
- If the title is subject to a resolutory condition, and the
condition us fulfilled, the servitude is extinguished.
- If the servitude is created by the usufructuary or by a
possessor in good faith, the servitude is terminated when
the usufruct or possession is terminated. In such a case,
what was actually granted is just a personal right.
Can a servitude co-exist with a subsisting usufruct?
When the usufruct of a piece of land is contracted to another

person, the owner of the land may impose servitudes thereon, even
without the consent of the usufructuary, provided the servitude ill not
affect or prejudice the usufruct (Article 689).
What is the limitation on usufruct with regard to voluntary

easement?
If the easement is perpetual, the consent of the naked owner as

well as the usufructuary must be obtained (Article 690).
However, the rule is different when the easement is legal. Its

imposition does not depend upon the consent of the co-owners. It is the
law which imposes it because of necessity.

What is the requirement to constitute a voluntary easement

on a property owned in common?
In order to impose an easement on an undivided tenement, or

piece of land, it is required that there must be consent of all the co-
owners.
However,
- The consent need not be simultaneously as the law

provides that the consent already given by some will be held
in abeyance until the last one of all the co-owners shall
have expressed his conformity.
- The consent given by one of the co-owners separately from
the others shall bind the grantor and his successors not to
prevent the exercise of the right granted (Article 691).
- Once the consent of a co-owner is given, he cannot
withdraw it anymore, unless the consent is vitiated. His
successors cannot revoke the consent already given.
- During the time that the other co-owners have not yet given
their consent to the constitution of the easement, the
consent previously given by a co-owner will stand as a
continuing consent. He need not give another consent,
when all the others had finally given theirs.
What are the rules which determine the rights of the dominant
estate and obligations of the servient estate?
The relationship of the dominant estate and the servient estate

insofar as their rights and obligations are concerned are governed:
- By title (e.g. contract, will) which constituted the easement;

- By the manner and form of possession, if the easement was
acquired by prescription;
- In default thereof, the easement shall be governed by the
Civil Code provisions as are applicable thereto (Article 692).
The Civil Code will only apply suppletorily. However, in the

absence of the two above, the Civil Code shall apply primarily.
If the owner of the servient estate should have bound himself

to bear the cost of the work required for the use and preservation
thereof, how may he free himself from this obligation?

He may free himself from this obligation by renouncing his

property to the owner of the dominant estate (Article 693).
If the easement affects the entire servient tenement, the

renunciation or abandonment must be total.
BOOK III
Different Modes of Acquiring Ownership
INTRODUCTION
Ownership
Ownership is acquired by 1) occupation and by 2) intellectual

creation.
Ownership and other real rights over property are also acquired
and transmitted by 3) law, 4) donation, 5) testate and intestate
succession, 6) prescription and 7) in consequence of certain contracts,
tradition (Article 712).
The first three are original and the last four are derivative.
Theory of mode and title
Mode is a way or process of acquiring or transferring ownership;

while title refers to the juridical act or deed which is not sufficient by
itself to transfer ownership but it provides a juridical justification for the
effectuation of a mode. Consequently, mode directly produces a real
right, while title serves only to produce a means or occasion for its
acquisition. In other words, mode is the cause, while title is the means.
Thus, if a seller sells his car to a buyer, the sale is the title while
the delivery (tradition) is the mode which makes the buyer the owner of
the ring. A title merely creates a personal right which could real right if
followed with delivery. 38
Mode Title
38
Note that in the law on succession, the title is also the mode. Hereditary rights are
transferred from the moment of death of the decedent (Article 777). Delivery (tradition) is not a
condition pre-requisite to transfer ownership. Actual possession, however, may be exercised only
upon actual delivery (Article 1089; 1091).

Occupation Seizure Property seized is

without a known
owner
Intellectual creation Emergence or Originality or novelty
discovery
Law Force of law Concurrence of
prerequisite
conditions
Donation Formalities/delivery Agreement of parties
Succession Death Law or will
Tradition Delivery Agreement of the
parties
Prescription Lapse of prescribed Possession in the
period concept of an owner
MODES
I. Occupation
Occupation is a mode of acquiring ownership by 1) the seizure of 2)

corporeal things 3) which do not do not have an owner [res nullius] 4)
with the intention of acquiring them 5) in accordance with the rules
prescribed by law.
Things that may be acquired by occupation are those appropriable

by nature which are 1) without an owner, such as animals that are the
object of hunting and fishing, 2) hidden treasure and 3) abandoned
movables (Article 713). It cannot be asserted as a mode of acquiring
ownership over a thing that is owned by another
• Ownership of a piece of land cannot be acquired by occupation

(Article 714) because when land is without an owner, it pertains to
the State.
• Animals:
1) If the animal is wild in the sense that it is in its state of

natural freedom, the finder becomes the owner from the
moment that he has captured it. This rule is applicable even
to a wild animal which had been captured but which
regained its natural freedom (Article 713).

2) If the animal is domesticated in the sense that it was

originally wild but it has been captured, subdued and made
use of by man so that it has formed the habit of returning to
the premises of the possessor (Article 560), so long as it
retains the habit of returning to such premises, the finder
cannot become the owner thereof unless he complies with
the formalities prescribed by law for the acquisition of
ownership of ordinary personal property; but once it loses
the habit of retuning to such premises, he becomes the
owner thereof only if the original owner does not claim it
within 20 days to be counted from the time that it was
captured (Article 716).
3) If the animal is domestic in the sense that it was born or

reared under the power of man, lacking the instinct to roam
freely, the person who captured the same cannot be the
owner thereof unless he will comply with the formalities
prescribed by law for the acquisition of ownership of
ordinary personal property (Article 719).
• Abandoned movables (but not lost property):
1) If the owner of the movable is known, the finder can never

become the owner because under the law, he must return it
to the owner.
2) If the owner is unknown, the finder shall immediately

deposit the movable with the mayor of the place where the
finding took place. There shall be a public announcement of
the finding within two consecutive weeks. Six months from
publication having elapsed without the owner having
appeared, the thing found shall be awarded to the finder,
after reimbursement of the expenses (Article 719).
3) If the owner should appear in time, he shall be obliged to pay

the finder as a reward, one-tenth of the amount found
(Article 720).
• Hidden Treasures:
Hidden treasure can be acquired by occupation only if there is

no known owner thereof. This is possible only if the treasure is found in
places or things without owners. If the treasure is found on a land owned
by somebody, the treasure will belong to the landowner (Article 438).

2. Law
Law as a mode of acquiring ownership applies in a situation where

ownership is vested independently of the other modes of acquisition. This
in illustrated by the following Articles:
1. Whatever is built, planted or sown on the land of another and

the improvements or repairs made thereon, belong to the owner
of the land (Article 445).
2. River beds which are abandoned through the natural change in
the course of the waters ipso facto belong to the owners whose
lands are occupied by the new course in proportion to the area
lost (Article 461).
3. Islands which through successive accumulation of alluvial
deposits are formed in non-navigable and non-floatable rivers,
belong to the owners of the margins or banks nearest to each of
them, or to the owners of both margins if the island is in the
middle of the river, in which case it shall be divided
longitudinally in halves. If a single island thus formed be more
distant from one margin than from the other, the owner of the
nearer margin shall be the sole owner thereof (Article 465).
4. Whenever two movable things belonging to different owners are,
without bad faith, united in such a way that they form a single
object, the owner of the principal thing acquires the accessory,
indemnifying the former owner thereof for its value (Article 466).
5. Fruits naturally falling upon adjacent land belong to the owner
of said land (Article 681).
6. Where spouses, using conjugal funds cause improvements on
land owned exclusively by one of them, if the improvements cost
more than the land, land becomes conjugal at time of
reimbursement (Article 120, Family Code).
7. When a person who is not the owner of a thing sells or alienates
and delivers it, and later the seller or grantor acquires title
thereto, such title passes by operation of law to the buyer or
grantee (Article 1484).
8. If the property is acquired through mistake or fraud, the person
obtaining it is, by force of law, considered a trustee of an
implied trust for the benefit of the person from whom the
property comes (Article 1456).
9. Hidden treasure belongs to the owner of the land, building, or
other property on which it is found (Article 438).
3. Intellectual Creation
By intellectual creation, the following persons acquire ownership:

1) The author with regard to his literary, dramatic, historical,

legal, philosophical, scientific or other work;
2) The composer, as to his musical composition;
3) The painter, sculptor, or other artist, with respect to the
product of his art;
4) The scientist or technologist or any other person with regard
to his discovery or invention (Article 721).
The author and the composer, mentioned in Nos. 1 and 2 of the

preceding article, shall have the ownership of their creations even before
the publication of the same. Once their works are published, their rights
are governed by the Copyright laws.
The painter, sculptor or other artist shall have dominion over the
product of his art even before it is copyrighted.
The scientist or technologist has the ownership of his discovery or

invention even before it is patented (Article 722).
Letters and other private communications in writing are owned by

the person to whom they are addressed and delivered, but they cannot
be published or disseminated without the consent of the writer or his
heirs. However, the court may authorize their publication or
dissemination if the public good or the interest of justice so requires
(Article 723).
4. Tradition
Tradition, defined as legal delivery, is a derivative mode of

acquiring ownership and other real rights by virtue of which (1) they are
transmitted from the patrimony of the grantor, in which they had
previously existed, to that of the grantee (2) by means of a just title, (3)
there being both the intention and the capacity on the part of both
parties. (4) The transmission should be manifested by some act which
may be physical, symbolical or legal.
Ownership is not transferred by the mere perfection of the contract

but by delivery which could either be actual or constructive.
• Kinds of tradition recognized by the Civil Code:
1) Real tradition – takes place by the delivery or transfer of a thing

from hand o hand if it is movable, or by certain material and

possessory acts of the grantee performed in the presence and with

the consent of the grantor if it is immovable.
2) Constructive tradition – takes place by the delivery of a movable or

immovable thing by means of acts or signs indicative thereof.
This delivery may take place in the following manner:

a. Traditio symbolica – consists in the delivery of symbol
representing the thing which is delivered, such as the key to
a warehouse.
b. Traditio longa manu – consists in the grantor pointing out to

the grantee the thing which is delivered which at the time
must be within sight.
c. Traditio brevi manu – consists when the grantee is already in

possession of the thing under a title which is not of
ownership, such as when the lessee purchases from the
lessor the object of the lease.
d. Traditio constitutum possessorium – takes place when the

grantor alienates a thing belonging to him, but continues in
possession thereof under a different title, such as that of a
lessee, pledge or depositary.
3) Quasi-tradicion – it consists in the delivery of incorporeal property

like rights and credits done through the (a) placing titles of
ownership in the hands of the grantee or his representative; or (b)
by allowing the grantee to make use of the rights with the consent
of the grantor (Article 1501).
4) Tradicio por minesterio de la ley – refers to delivery which takes

place by operation of law such as intestate succession where
inheritance is transferred upon death of the decedent.
5. Donation
Nature of Donations
Donation is an act of liberality whereby a person disposes

gratuitously of a thing or right in favor of another, who accepts it (Article
725).
When a person gives to another a thing or right on account of the

latter's merits or of the services rendered by him to the donor, provided

they do not constitute a demandable debt, 39 or when the gift imposes

upon the donee a burden which is less than the value of the thing given,
there is also a donation 40 (Article 726).
• When considered post-mortem:
1. Transferor has retained title or ownership and control of the

property;
2. Transferor has reserved his right to revoke at will;
3. Transfer would be void if the transferor should survive the
transferee.
• Tests to determine whether donation is mortis causa or inter vivos:
1. If the act is one of disposition and effective independently of the

donor’s death, it is a donation inter vivos.
2. If it is one of disposition but its effectivity is dependent upon the
death of the donor, it is a mortis causa donation.
3. If ownership of property is reserved to the donor during his
lifetime, donation is mortis causa.
4. If what is reserved is only the usufruct, it is donation inter vivos.
5. When the donor reserved the right to revoke donation, it is mortis
causa.
6. In donation in praesanti, the donation is effective during the
lifetime of the donor but the delivery of the possession of the
property shall be after the death of the donor (Article 729). Thus it
is a donation inter vivos.
7. When there is doubt on the nature of the donation, the doubt
should be resolved in favor of donation inter vivos, rather than
mortis causa to avoid uncertainty as to the ownership pf the
property subject of the deed of donation.
Kinds
1) Simple or pure (Article 725)

2) Remuneratory (Article 726, 1st portion)
3) Conditional (Articles 730, 731 and 764)
4) Modal (Article 726, 2nd portion)
5) Onerous (Article 733)
39
Meaning of “not demandable debt”: that the service rendered did not create any
obligation enforceable against the donor. This is remuneratory donation.
40
This is modal institution where the burden my consist of a charge that is not a
condition in its technical sense, but a mere obligation imposed on the donee by the donor. The
mode or burden is a mere restriction on the benefit conferred upon the donee. It does not affect
the right of the donee. Example: Donation of a land to the State to make it a public park.

Effect of illegal or impossible conditions
If illegal or impossible conditions are imposed on a pure or

remuneratory donation, they are deemed not imposed at all (Article 727).
The donation remains valid without the condition. This is the same rule
followed in testamentary succession because both are gratuitous modes
of acquiring ownership.
However, onerous donations are not covered by the Article. They

are governed by the law on contracts where the rule is that if illegal or
impossible conditions are imposed on contracts, the obligation itself
becomes void (Article 1183). There is an onerous donation if a burden is
imposed on the donee and the burden is equivalent to the value of the
thing donated or when a donation is made in settlement or payment of a
demandable debt.
Perfection
Donation is perfected, not from the time of acceptance of the

donation by the donee, but from the moment the donor has known that
the donee has accepted the donation (Article 734).
The acceptance must be made during the lifetime of the donor and
of the donee (Article 746).
Capacity to Make and Accept Donations
1) In order that a person can make a donation three requisites are

necessary:
1) He must have the capacity to enter into contracts;

2) He must be able to dispose of his property; and
3) He must not be prohibited or disqualified by law from making
the donation.
He must therefore have full civil capacity.
The donor's capacity shall be determined as of the time of the

making of the donation (Article 737), meaning at the time of the
perfection of the donation.
2) In order that a person can accept a donation only one requisite is

necessary. He must not be prohibited or disqualified by law from
accepting donation.

• Minors and others who cannot enter into a contract 41 may become
donees but acceptance shall be done through their parents or legal
representatives (Article 741).
• Donations made to conceived and unborn children may be

accepted by those persons who would legally represent them if they
were already born. It is however essential that (1) the conceived
and unborn child at the time of the donation must be born alive
and gained personality in accordance with Article 41 of the Civil
Code (if the conceived child did not become a person, the donation
is null and void); and (2) the donation is favorable to the child (if
the donation is not favorable to the child, as when the burdens of
an onerous donation are prejudicial to the child’s interest, the
donation shall not be operative).
Prohibited Donations
The following donations shall be void:
1) Those made between persons who were guilty of adultery or

concubinage at the time of the donation;
2) Those made between persons found guilty of the same criminal
offense, in consideration thereof;
3) Those made to a public officer or his wife, descendants and
ascendants, by reason of his office (Article 739);
4) Those made to the priest who heard the confession of the testator
during his last illness, or the minister of the gospel who extended
spiritual aid to him during the same period;
5) Those made to the relatives of such priest or minister of the gospel
within the fourth degree, the church, order, chapter, community,
organization, or institution to which such priest or minister may
belong;
6) Those made by the ward to the guardian before final account of the
guardianship have been approved, unless the guardian is a
spouse, ascendant, descendant, brother or sister;
7) Those made to the attesting witness to the execution of a will, the
spouse, parents, or children, or any one claiming under such
witness, spouse, parents, or children;
8) Those made to the physician, surgeon, nurse, health officer or
druggist who took care of the testator during his last illness;
9) Those made to individuals, associations and corporations not
permitted by law to inherit (Article 1027);
41
The term “others” refers to those who are incapacitated by reason of the restriction in
their capacity to act, like the insane, imbecile and deaf-mutes. It does not refer to those
incapacitated under Article 739 of the Civil Code and Article 89 of the Family Code.

10) Those made by the spouse to each other during the

marriage, or between those persons living together as husband and
wife without a valid marriage (Article 87, Family Code).
• Effect of donations made to incapacitated persons 42 – the donation

shall be void though simulated under the guise of another contract
or through a person who is interposed.
Formalities
1) If the donation is simple or remuneratory:
(1) If movable –
a) If the value of the property is worth five

thousand pesos or less, there must be
simultaneous delivery of the thing or the
document representing the right donated to the
donee (actual or constructive delivery). Oral
donation is allowed here but there is no
prohibition to accept the donation in writing.
b) If the value of the personal property donated
exceeds five thousand pesos - the donation and
the acceptance must be made in writing,
although it need not be in a public instrument.
Otherwise, the donation shall be void even if
there is simultaneous delivery (Article 748).
(2) If immovable –
a) It must be made in a public document

(notarized), specifying therein the property
donated and the value of the charges which the
donee must satisfy.
b) The acceptance may be made in the same deed
burden of donation or in a separate public
document, but it shall not take effect unless it is
done during the lifetime of the donor.
c) If the acceptance is made in a separate
instrument, the donor shall be notified thereof in
42
Incapacitated persons here do not refer to minors or insane or others merely suffering
from restrictions in their capacity to act under Articles 38 and 39 of the Civil Code. They refer to
persons expressly declared by law to be incapacitated to receive donations like those mentioned
in Article 739 of the Civil Code and Article 87 of the Family Code.

an authentic form, and this step shall be noted

in both instruments (Article 749).
2) If the donation is conditional:
The formalities required above are applicable to that portion

which exceeds the value of the burden imposed, while the
formalities prescribed for the execution of ordinary contracts are
applicable to that portion which is the equivalent of such burden
(Article 733).
3) If the donation is onerous:
The formalities prescribed for the execution of ordinary

contracts shall have to be complied (Article 733). They need not be
in public instruments because they are governed by the rules of
contracts (Manalo vs. De Mesa, 20 Phil. 495; Danguilan vs. IAC, 168
SCRA 22).
4) If the donation is by reason of marriage settlement:
The Statute of Frauds shall have to be complied with.
5) If the donation is mortis causa:
The formalities prescribed for the execution of wills shall

have to be complied with (Article 728).
Limitations
The most fundamental limitations which are imposed by law upon

the extent of property which may be donated inter vivos are:
1) The donor must reserve sufficient means for the support of

himself, and of all relatives who, at the time of the acceptance of
the donation, are by law entitled to be supported by the donor 43
(Article 750).
43 A donation where the donor did not reserve property or assets for himself in full
ownership or in usufruct sufficient for his support and all relatives legally dependent upon him,
is not void. It is merely reducible to the extent that the support to himself and his relatives is
impaired or prejudiced.
If the donor did not reserve enough assets to pay his creditors whom he owed before the
donation, the donation is presumed to be in fraud of creditors (Article 759). The creditors may
rescind the donation to the extent of their credits (Article 1387). The action is known as accion
pauliana.

2) Donations cannot comprehend future property 44 (Article 751).

3) No person may give or receive, by way of donation, more than he
may give or receive by will. The donation shall be inofficious in all
that it may exceed this limitation (Article 752).
Effect of inofficious donations
Donations which are inofficious shall not prevent the donations

from taking effect during the life of the donor, nor shall it bar the donee
from appropriating the fruits (Article 771).
However, when the donor dies, the compulsory heirs whose

legitime is impaired can ask for the reduction of the donation.
Reversion
The property donated may be restored or returned to the a) donor

or to Reversion (restoration or return) to the donor or to his estate) may
be validly established in favor of the donor or in favor of other persons;
hnor his estate; or b) in favor of other persons who must be living at the
time of the donation; otherwise, the reversion is void, although the
donation is still valid (Article 757). The reversion is a condition
established in the deed of donation.
Revocation
Special modes by which donation inter vivos may be revoked:
1) Supervening birth, survival, or adoption of a child (Article 760);

2) Non-fulfillment of the condition or charge imposed (Article 764);
3) Acts of ingratitude of the donee (Article 765);
4) Inofficious donations (Article 771);
5) When the donation is in fraud of creditors and the amount of the
judgment is equal or more than the amount of the disposable free
portion (Article 1387).
Reduction
Special modes by which donation inter vivos may be reduced:
44 Any property which the donor could not dispose of at the time of the donation is
future property.
Exception to the rule that future property cannot be donated: The exception involves
marriage settlements of prospective spouses wherein they are allowed to donate properties to
each other to the extent permitted by law (Article 84, Family Code).

1) When donor did not reserve sufficient means for his support as
well as for the support of all relatives who, at the time of the
donation, are by law entitled to be supported by such donor (Article
750).
2) Supervening birth, survival or adoption of a child 45 (Article 760).
3) Inofficious donation (Article 771).
4) When the donation is in fraud of creditors and the amount of the
judgment is equal or more than the amount of the disposable free
portion (Article 1387).
Reduction or revocation under Article 760:
• Extent:
1) In the cases referred to Article 760, the donation shall be

revoked or reduced insofar as it exceeds the portion that
may be freely disposed of by will, taking into account the
whole estate of the donor at the time of the birth,
appearance or adoption of a child (Article 761).
2) Upon the revocation or reduction of the donation by the
birth, appearance or adoption of a child, the property
affected shall be returned or its value if the donee has
sold the same.
3) If the property is mortgaged, the donor may redeem the
mortgage, by paying the amount guaranteed, with a right
to recover the same from the donee.
4) When the property cannot be returned, it shall be
estimated at what it was worth at the time of the
donation (Article 762).
• How reduction takes place:
From the phraseology of Article 763, a judicial action is necessary

for the reduction of the donation if any of the events mentioned in Article
760 shall happen.
• Prescription:
The action shall prescribe after four years from the birth of the first
child, or from his legitimation, recognition or adoption, or from the
The limitation in Article 760 covers only the birth of a child; the discovery that a child
45
believed to be dead is alive; and the adoption of a minor child. The descendants of these children,
if any, are not included within the coverage of the Article. Their birth, emergence or adoption
will not be causes for the revocation or reduction of the donation.

judicial declaration of filiation, or from the time information was received

regarding the existence of the child believed dead.
In the event that two or more causes are present, the earliest
among them shall be the starting point in the reckoning of the period of
prescription of the action.
• Transmission of right to revoke:
This action cannot be renounced, and is transmitted, upon the

death of the donor, to his legitimate and illegitimate children and
descendants (Article 763).
Revocation because of non-fulfillment of condition:
The donation shall be revoked at the instance of the donor, when

the donee fails to comply with any of the conditions which the former
imposed upon the latter.
In this case, the property donated shall be returned to the donor,

the alienations made by the donee and the mortgages imposed thereon
by him being void, with the limitations established, with regard to third
persons, by the Mortgage Law and the Land Registration laws.
• Prescription:
This action shall prescribe after four years from the noncompliance
with the condition.
• Transmissibility of right to revoke:
The action to revoke may be transmitted to the heirs of the donor,

and may be exercised against the donee's heirs (Article 764).
• Distinctions between Articles 760 (supervening birth, survival, or

adoption of a child) and Article 764 (non-fulfillment of the
condition or charge imposed):
Article 760 Article 764

1. Applies both to revocation or Applies only to revocation.
reduction of the donation.
2. The grounds are (a) birth of The ground is failure to comply
a child; (b) appearance of a with the condition or conditions
child believed dead; and (c) imposed by the donor.
subsequent adoption of a

minor child.
3. Mortgages executed by the Alienation or mortgages executed
donee are valid. by the donee are void, unless, the
grantee is an innocent third
person.
4. The right of action cannot be Right of action can be waived or
renounced. renounced there being no
prohibition.
• Similarities of Articles 760 and 764:
1) In both articles, if there is revocation, the donee shall return

the property if it is still in his possession. If not, he must pay
the value thereof.
2) Further, the right of action to revoke is transmitted to the
heirs of the donor.
3) If the donor dies in both articles, the suit for revocation may
be pursued against the heirs or assigns of the donee.
Revocation because of acts of ingratitude:
The donation may also be revoked at the instance of the donor, by

reason of ingratitude in the following cases:
1) If the donee should commit some offense against the person, the
honor or the property of the donor, or of his wife or children under
his parental authority;
2) If the donee imputes to the donor any criminal offense, or any act
involving moral turpitude, even though he should prove it, unless
the crime or the act has been committed against the donee himself,
his wife or children under his authority;
3) If he unduly refuses him support when the donee is legally or
morally bound to give support to the donor (Article 765).
• The grounds enumerated for the revocation of donations by reason

of ingratitude are limitative. They are exclusive.
• The general rule is that donation are revocable by reason of the

ingratitude of the donee except the following donations:
1) Mortis causa donations – because these donations take effect

after death of the donor. After death, the donor could no
longer initiate the revocation of the donation he executed.

2) Onerous donations – because these donations are made for

some considerations, hence they can not just be revoked.
Such donations are not based on pure liberality.
• Note: Donation proper nuptias may be revoked based on acts of

ingratitude of the donee (Article 86 [6] Family Code)
• Rule as to alienations and mortgages in donations judicially

revoked because of ingratitude:
1) The alienations and mortgages executed by the donee before the

registration with the Registry of Deeds of the pendency of the
complaint (lis pendens) will be valid.
2) All alienations and mortgages executed by the donee after the
registration of the lis pendens shall be void.
3) Even without registration, if the buyer or mortgagee of the property
donated knew of the complaint for revocation, the sale or mortgage
will be void as he acted in bad faith. His actual knowledge of the
complaint is tantamount to registration
• Remedy of the owner: If the property is already transferred in the

name of the buyer or mortgagee, the remedy of the donor is to
recover the value of the property determined as of the time of the
donation (Article 767).
• Things to return after revocation of donations:

1) If the revocation is due to non-compliance with any condition
- both the property and the fruits shall be returned. These
fruits are those acquired after the failure to comply with the
condition.
2) If the revocation is due to (a) causes stated in Article 760; (b)
ingratitude; and inofficious donation - only the fruits
accruing from the filing of the action shall be returned.
• Prescription:
This action prescribes within one year, to be counted from the time
the donor had knowledge of the fact and it was possible for him to bring
the action (Article 769).
• Transmissibility of right to revoke:
The action granted to the donor by reason of ingratitude cannot be

renounced in advance.

Being purely personal in character, as a rule this action shall not

be transmitted to the heirs of the donor, if the latter did not institute the
case, although he could have done so, and even if he should die before
the expiration of one year; neither can this action be brought against the
heir of the donee, unless upon the latter's death the complaint has been
filed (Article 770).
• Exceptions to the first rule (where the heirs of the donor may
institute the action for revocation):
1) If the action had already been brought by the donor, but he died
before it could be decided;
2) If the circumstances clearly manifest that the donor desired and
intended to revoke the donation, but was prevented by sickness,
insanity, or even fortuitous event from bringing the action, and he
died without being able to file the corresponding complaint within
the one year period of prescription;
3) If the donee killed the donor or inflicted injuries causing his death;
4) If the donor died without having known the act of ingratitude; and
5) If the donor had already instituted criminal proceedings against
the donee but died before he could file the corresponding civil
action for revocation of donation.
• Exception to the second rule (where the action may be brought

against the heirs of the donee): If the complaint has already been
filed upon the donee’s death (Article 770).
Reduction/revocation of Inofficious donation:
• Prescription:
Being similar to actions for recission of rescissible contracts

(Article 1390), the period of prescription for bringing the action for
revocation or reduction of the donation is four years to be counted from
the death of the donor.
• Persons who can ask for revocation/reduction:
This kind of action is pursuable only after the donor’s death

(because the inofficiousness of the donation is determinable only after
death of the donor). Thus, only compulsory heirs and their heirs and
successors in interest may ask for the reduction or inofficious donations.
Creditors of the donor can neither ask for the reduction nor avail
themselves thereof (Article 772). This does not mean however that

such creditors have no right to impugn the validity of the donation. They
may do so if it was entered into in fraud of them and the action for
rescission is brought within the period prescribed by law (Article 1387).
• Order of reduction:
If, there being two or more donations, the disposable portion is not
sufficient to cover all of them, those of the more recent date shall be
suppressed or reduced with regard to the excess (Article 773) . In other
words, the later donations must be dropped first. The earlier donations
are given preference in accordance with the principle that, (1) “priority in
time gives priority in rights, and (2) the irrevocability of donations inter
vivos.
• As exception to Article 773, there shall be no reduction in the case

of certain wedding gifts made in favor of descendants by their
parents or ascendants which should not exceed one-tenth of the
sum of the disposable free portion (Article 1070).
Rules as to fruits for revoked or reduced donations:
1) If ground is under Article 760 (supervening birth, survival or

adoption of a child) – the donee shall not return the fruits except
from the filing of the complaint (Article 768);
2) If ground is under Article 764 (Non-fulfillment of the condition or
charge imposed) – the donee shall return not only the property but
also the fruits thereof which he may have received after having
failed to fulfill the condition (Article 768);
3) If ground is under 771 (Inofficious donations) – while the donor
lives, the donation shall take effect, and therefore, the donee shall
be entitled to the fruits (Article 771)
- o00o-

Property Outline

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Property Outline

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Property Outline

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BOOK II

Property, Ownership, and its Modifications

TITLE I. – CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY

ARTICLE 414. “All things which are or may be the object of

(1) Immovable or real property; or

Property is any physical or incorporeal entity capable of becoming

As a subject in a law course, property is that branch of civil law

What are the distinctions of property, right to property and

Property is an economic concept, meaning a mass of things or

The right to property is clearly different from property, and is

Distinguish between things and property.

Things, in a juridical sense, includes only objects which can be of

What requisites must concur in order for an object to be

a. Utility or the capacity to satisfy moral or economic wants

What are common things?

They are things which, as a whole mass, are not susceptible of

Is the living human body considered a thing or property?

By: Kathryn Pineda-Dela Serna

In general, the living human body is not considered as things,

Is a corpse considered a thing?

Upon death, the corpse becomes a thing, although it is not

It cannot be subject to an onerous contract, although a gratuitous

Are res nullius objects considered things?

One of the requisites of a thing for juridical purposes is that it is

What is the meaning of appropriation?

The Code does not define appropriation. It has been considered

Are rights considered things?

Things, in a juridical sense, include not only material objects, but

What are the two kinds of rights?

1. Real rights – a real right is the power to a person over a specific

2. Personal rights – a personal right is the power belonging to one

By: Kathryn Pineda-Dela Serna

fulfillment of a presentation to give, to do or not to do. Personal

What the elements that manifest the characteristics of real

1. A subject and an object connected by a relation of ownership of

What are the characteristics of personal rights?

How are things classified by reason of ownership?

1. Common (res communes) – those which do not belong to anyone in

3. Corporate – those owned by a collective entity and enjoyed by its

By: Kathryn Pineda-Dela Serna

4. Res nullius – things belonging to no one because they have not

5. Private or res alicujus – objects which are owned privately, either

How is property classified according to its nature?

According to its nature, property may be either:

1. Immovable or real property – when they cannot be

2. Movable or personal property – those which can by their

3. Semi-movables – those which move by themselves, such as

This class has already disappeared. Animals belong to

How are things classified by reason of their importance?

1. Principal – those which other things are considered dependent or

2. Accessory – those which are dependent upon or subordinated to

The general rule is that the accessory follows the principal. An

By: Kathryn Pineda-Dela Serna

How is property classified according to its ownership?

According to its ownership, it may either be:

1. Of public ownership (Article 419); or

What is the importance of classifying property into

1. Formalities required, like in mortgages (Lopez vs. Orosa, Associated

3. To bind third persons.